A federal judge dismissed President Donald Trump’s $10 billion defamation lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal and Rupert Murdoch on Monday, ruling that the legal challenge failed to meet the high threshold required to prove the news organization acted with “actual malice.”
U.S. District Judge Darrin P. Gayles issued the order in Florida, concluding that Trump’s legal team did not provide sufficient evidence that the Journal intentionally published false information or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. However, the dismissal was granted with leave to amend, providing the president an opportunity to revive the case.
Shortly after the ruling, Trump characterized the decision as a procedural step rather than a total loss. In a social media post, he described the order as a “suggested re-filing” of a “powerful case.” He confirmed his intention to submit an amended complaint on or before April 27.
The litigation, filed last July, centers on a Wall Street Journal report concerning Trump’s historical ties to deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The article highlighted a 2003 letter, allegedly signed by Trump, which was included in a 50th-birthday album for Epstein.
The document, which contains sexually suggestive content, was later released by Congress following a subpoena of Epstein’s estate records. Trump has vehemently denied authorship, labeling the reporting “false, malicious, and defamatory.”
Attorneys representing the Wall Street Journal and Rupert Murdoch argued for a dismissal based on the premise that the article’s statements were factually accurate. Judge Gayles, however, declined to rule on the authenticity of the letter itself at this stage.
“Whether President Trump was the author of the Letter or Epstein’s friend are questions of fact that cannot be determined at this stage of the litigation,” Gayles wrote.
Instead, the dismissal rested solely on the failure to establish actual malice—a constitutional requirement for public figures seeking defamation damages.
This ruling represents a significant moment in the ongoing tension between the Trump administration and the media. Critics argue the lawsuit is an attempt to use the judiciary to stifle investigative journalism.
The White House has not issued an official comment. Conversely, a spokesperson for Dow Jones, the Journal’s publisher, stated the organization is “pleased” with the decision.
“We stand behind the reliability, rigor, and accuracy of The Wall Street Journal’s reporting,” the spokesperson said.
