The short version
- U.S. District Judge Darrin Gayles dismissed the lawsuit with prejudice, preventing any future refiling or amendment of the complaint.
- The ruling cited the high legal bar for public figures to prove defamation, noting the newspaper included Trump's denials and did not act with reckless disregard for the truth.
- Despite the dismissal, Trump’s legal team vowed to continue holding media outlets accountable, while Dow Jones expressed satisfaction with the court’s decision.
A federal judge in Miami has permanently dismissed Donald Trump’s $10 billion defamation lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal and media mogul Rupert Murdoch. U.S. District Judge Darrin Gayles issued the final ruling on Saturday, throwing out the case with prejudice. This legal designation means the president cannot amend his complaint or refile the suit, effectively ending this specific legal challenge over the newspaper’s reporting on Trump’s alleged ties to Jeffrey Epstein.
The lawsuit centered on a July 2025 article that described a sexually suggestive letter and drawing attributed to Trump, which was reportedly included in a birthday album for Epstein in 2003. The note, collected by Ghislaine Maxwell, featured text framed by an outline of a naked woman and ended with the phrase, 'Happy Birthday — and may every day be another wonderful secret.' Trump has consistently denied writing the letter, characterizing the story as false, malicious, and defamatory.
Judge Gayles determined that Trump failed to meet the legal standard of 'actual malice,' a requirement established by the Supreme Court in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan for public figures seeking damages for defamation. To win such a case, a plaintiff must prove that the defendant knowingly published false information or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. The judge found the allegations regarding malice to be conclusory, vague, and often irrelevant to whether the defendants knew the statements were false.
The court noted that The Wall Street Journal had taken steps to verify its reporting and included Trump’s direct denials in the article. Rather than ignoring or minimizing the president’s claims that the letter was a fake, the publication informed readers of his objections. This inclusion served as evidence that the newspaper followed appropriate journalistic standards and did not proceed with the belief that the material was likely false.
This dismissal follows an earlier ruling in April when Judge Gayles initially threw out the suit for similar reasons but allowed Trump to file an amended complaint. The president’s legal team submitted revised allegations in May, arguing that the paper had knowingly published disparaging statements that caused overwhelming financial and reputational harm. However, the judge concluded that the amended complaint still fell short of plausibly alleging actual malice.
The case drew significant attention because it named Rupert Murdoch, a prominent media ally of Trump, as a defendant. News Corporation, which owns The Wall Street Journal, had been targeted despite the personal relationship between the two men. Reports indicate that Trump personally contacted Murdoch before the article’s publication in an effort to stop it from running. A spokesperson for Dow Jones expressed pleasure with the court’s decision, while representatives for the Journal had argued throughout the proceedings that the story was accurate and did not meet the bar for defamation.
The ruling represents a setback for Trump’s broader campaign against news organizations during his second term. The president has maintained adversarial relationships with multiple outlets, including the BBC, The Associated Press, CNN, MS NOW, and Politico. Several of these organizations have sued to regain access to the White House after being banned in mid-September. Trump frequently labels critical media coverage as 'fake news' and has pursued legal action against journalists and publishers he believes are misleading the public.
Despite the permanent dismissal, Trump’s legal team issued a statement vowing to continue pressing forward with lawsuits against other defendants. The spokesperson asserted that the president would hold those who spread smears accountable for their actions. Meanwhile, the image of the letter itself was not originally published by The Wall Street Journal but was later released by the House oversight committee in September after being provided by Epstein’s estate. Jeffrey Epstein died by suicide in a New York jail cell in August 2019 while awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges.
The judge’s opinion criticized the lawsuit for attempting to manufacture flaws in the investigative reporting. By dismissing the case with prejudice, the court signaled that the legal arguments presented did not warrant further judicial review. This outcome underscores the difficulty public figures face when attempting to use defamation law to suppress unfavorable but reported news coverage, particularly when outlets include subject responses and adhere to established verification practices.
As the legal battle concludes, the focus remains on the broader implications for press freedom and presidential accountability. The dismissal reinforces the precedent that media outlets are protected when they report on matters of public interest with reasonable care and transparency. Trump’s administration continues to navigate tensions with the press, but this specific chapter involving The Wall Street Journal and the Epstein birthday letter has now reached its final legal resolution.
Sources behind this briefing
Go to the original reporting
- PBS NewsHour↗Judge dismisses Trump suit against Wall Street Journal over Epstein birthday letter
- The Guardian US Politics↗Judge dismisses Trump lawsuit against Wall Street Journal over Epstein birthday letter
