Federal Judge Dismisses Trump Defamation Suit Against Wall Street Journal

A federal judge in Florida has dismissed a defamation lawsuit filed by former President Donald Trump against The Wall Street Journal and its parent company. The lawsuit stemmed from a 2025 report about a letter Trump allegedly sent to the late financier Jeffrey Epstein. The judge ruled the complaint did not meet the legal standard required for defamation claims by public figures but granted Trump's legal team permission to refile an amended lawsuit by a late April deadline.

The Lawsuit and the Article

The legal action was filed in the summer of 2024 in response to a Wall Street Journal article published on July 17, 2025. The article, titled "Jeffrey Epstein’s Friends Sent Him Bawdy Letters for a 50th Birthday Album. One Was From Donald Trump," reported that Trump had sent a letter containing a lewd drawing to Epstein in 2003.

Trump's lawsuit argued that the drawing referenced in the article was not authentic. The Journal did not originally publish the image of the drawing. According to court documents and reports, the image was released by the House Oversight Committee in September 2024 after being provided by Epstein’s estate.

The defendants named in the lawsuit included The Wall Street Journal, its parent company News Corporation, and News Corp's executive chairman, Rupert Murdoch. Some reports indicate Trump called Murdoch personally prior to the article's publication in an attempt to prevent it from running.

The Court's Ruling

U.S. District Judge Darrin P. Gayles dismissed the complaint on Monday, March 17, 2025.

The central finding was that the lawsuit "fails to adequately allege actual malice," which is the legal standard required for defamation cases involving public figures.

Key points from the judge's ruling include:

• Standard of "Actual Malice": For a public figure to succeed in a defamation claim, they must prove the publisher acted with "actual malice"—meaning they knew the information was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth.
• Journal's Verification Efforts: Judge Gayles noted there was significant evidence presented that The Wall Street Journal sought to verify the authenticity of the drawing before publication.
• Insufficient Allegations: The ruling stated that Trump's claim the drawing was fake, by itself, did not demonstrate the Journal published the story "with serious doubts" about its accuracy. The judge wrote that the complaint did not plausibly allege the defendants knew the story was false or likely false.
• Lack of Special Damages: The judge also noted that Trump's legal team had not provided evidence or allegations of "special damages," which are specific financial losses tied directly to the alleged defamation.

The dismissal was without prejudice, meaning the case was not terminated. Judge Gayles gave Trump's legal team until April 27, 2025, to refile an amended complaint with additional evidence.

Reactions from Both Sides

Statements from the involved parties were issued following the ruling.

• Trump Legal Team: A spokesperson stated, "President Trump will follow Judge Gayles’s ruling and guidance to refile this lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal and all of the other defendants." The spokesperson added that Trump "will continue to hold accountable those who traffic in fake news to mislead the American people."
• Donald Trump: On his Truth Social platform, Trump characterized the ruling as a "suggested re-filing," writing, "It is not a termination... and we will be, as per the Order, re-filing an updated lawsuit on or before April 27th."
• Dow Jones & Company: A spokesperson for Dow Jones, the News Corp division that publishes The Wall Street Journal, said, "We are pleased with the judge’s decision to dismiss this complaint. We stand behind the reliability, rigor and accuracy of The Wall Street Journal’s reporting."

Broader Legal Context

This lawsuit is one of several active legal actions involving Trump and media organizations.

• Trump has also filed a separate lawsuit against the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) concerning the editing of a documentary.
• During Trump's administration, several media companies filed lawsuits against the administration over First Amendment-related issues.