A federal judge in Florida has permanently dismissed former President Donald Trump’s $10 billion defamation lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal, its parent company News Corp, and journalists over a 2023 report alleging a sexually suggestive birthday card signed by Trump was included in a 2003 book for Jeffrey Epstein. U.S. District Judge Darrin Gayles ruled on Saturday that Trump failed to meet the legal standard of actual malice, a requirement for defamation claims involving public figures.
The lawsuit centered on a Wall Street Journal investigation published last year, which described a card allegedly signed by Trump and featuring a hand-drawn outline of a naked woman with Trump’s first name signed in the pubic area. The Journal reported the card was part of a birthday book compiled for Epstein’s 50th birthday in 2003. Trump has consistently denied writing the card, calling the story “FAKE NEWS” and alleging the document was fabricated.
Judge dismisses suit with prejudice
Gayles dismissed the case with prejudice, meaning Trump cannot refile the lawsuit. In a 20-page ruling, the judge stated Trump’s amended complaint suffered from the same flaws as his initial filing, failing to plausibly allege that the defendants acted with actual malice. The judge wrote that Trump’s allegations were “conclusory, vague, sometimes inconsistent with the article, and often irrelevant” to proving malice. The ruling also described the lawsuit as “grasping at straws”, attempting to “manufacture” flaws in the Journal’s reporting.
Document’s authenticity disputed
The Wall Street Journal’s story was later corroborated when Epstein’s estate released a redacted version of the birthday book to House lawmakers, which included the card described in the article. The Trump administration, however, maintained the document was a fake, with then-White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt stating in a statement that “it’s very clear President Trump did not draw the image.”
Legal and political implications
The dismissal marks a legal setback for Trump, who has pursued multiple defamation lawsuits against media organizations in recent years. A spokesperson for Trump’s legal team told CBS News the former president would continue to appeal the decision. Legal experts note that defamation cases involving public figures face a high bar due to the actual malice standard, established in the 1964 Supreme Court case New York Times Co. v. Sullivan.
The case also intersects with broader debates over media accountability and the dissemination of unverified documents. The Wall Street Journal has defended its reporting, standing by the accuracy of its investigation into Trump’s past ties to Epstein, a financier convicted of sex trafficking in 2008. The ruling underscores the challenges public figures face in pursuing defamation claims when the underlying reporting is deemed newsworthy, even if contested.