Federal Judge Tosses Trump Defamation Case Over Epstein Letter, Allows Refiling
A federal judge in Florida has dismissed President Donald Trump’s $10 billion defamation lawsuit against media mogul Rupert Murdoch and The Wall Street Journal, ruling that the complaint failed to meet the legal threshold required for such claims. However, the court left the door open for Trump to try again, granting him until Apr 27 to file an amended version of the lawsuit.
The case stems from a July 2024 Wall Street Journal article that reported Trump had allegedly sent a “bawdy” letter to Jeffrey Epstein for his 50th birthday in 2003. Trump has repeatedly denied authoring the letter, calling the claim false and defamatory.
In his ruling, U.S. District Judge Darrin Gayles emphasized that public figures like Trump must demonstrate “actual malice” to succeed in a defamation case—meaning the defendants knowingly published false information or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. Gayles concluded that Trump’s complaint did not sufficiently meet that standard.
The judge wrote that Trump had “not plausibly alleged that the Defendants published the Article with actual malice.”
“President Trump argues that this allegation shows that Defendants acted with serious doubts about the truth of their reporting and, therefore, with actual malice. The Court disagrees. To establish actual malice, ‘a plaintiff must show the defendant deliberately avoided investigating the veracity of the statement in order to evade learning the truth.’ The Complaint comes nowhere close to this standard.”
Gayles also pointed to the reporting process outlined in the article itself.
“The Article explains that, before running the story, Defendants contacted President Trump, Justice Department officials, and the FBI for comment. President Trump responded with his denial, the Justice Department did not respond at all, and the FBI declined to comment. In short, the Complaint and Article confirm that Defendants attempted to investigate.”
Additionally, the judge highlighted that the article included Trump’s denial, further weakening claims that the publication acted with malicious intent. Still, citing legal precedent, Gayles said Trump should be given an opportunity to revise his complaint to better argue his case.
Notably, the ruling did not determine whether the Journal’s reporting was true or defamatory, only that the current lawsuit failed to adequately allege the required legal elements.
The Wall Street Journal article at the center of the dispute described a letter bearing Trump’s signature that was allegedly included in a birthday album compiled for Epstein. According to the report, the letter featured “several lines of typewritten text framed by the outline of a naked woman, which appears to be hand-drawn with a heavy marker.”
The article went on to describe the imagery in detail. “A pair of small arcs denotes the woman’s breasts, and the future president’s signature is a squiggly ‘Donald’ below her waist, mimicking pubic hair.” It concluded with the line, “Happy Birthday — and may every day be another wonderful secret.”
Trump forcefully rejected the account at the time, stating, “This is not me. This is a fake thing.” He added, “I never wrote a picture in my life. I don’t draw pictures of women.”
On Truth Social, Trump said his legal team would re-file the suit by the Apr 27 deadline.
“Our powerful case against The Wall Street Journal, and other defendants, was asked to be re-filed by the Judge. It is not a termination, it is a suggested re-filing.”
One day after the article was published, Trump filed suit against multiple defendants, including Murdoch, News Corp., the two reporters who wrote the story, and Dow Jones, the Journal’s publisher. Defense attorneys argued in court filings that the case should be dismissed on several grounds, including that the reporting was accurate, not defamatory, and did not meet the standard for actual malice.
Subsequent developments further complicated the situation. On Sept 8, House Democrats released an image they said resembled the letter described in the Journal’s reporting. The document had been obtained by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee through a subpoena issued to Epstein’s estate. At the time, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt claimed the image supported Trump’s denial, asserting it showed he neither drew nor signed the letter.
Following the court’s decision, a spokesperson for Trump’s legal team signaled that the fight is far from over. “President Trump will follow Judge Gayles’s ruling and guidance to re-file this powerhouse lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal and all of the other Defendants,” the spokesperson said. “The President will continue to hold accountable those who traffic in Fake News to mislead the American People.”
Epstein, the financier at the center of the controversy, died by suicide in August 2019 while being held without bail in a Manhattan federal jail. He had been arrested weeks earlier on charges of child sex trafficking.
Moumita Basuroychowdhury is a Contributing Reporter at The National Digest. After earning an economics degree at Cornell University, she moved to NYC to pursue her MFA in creative writing. She enjoys reporting on science, business and culture news. You can reach her at moumita.b@thenationaldigest.com.