President Donald Trump’s lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal is a $10 billion defamation case filed in July 2025 over a Journal article reporting that Trump contributed a sexually suggestive letter and drawing to a 2003 birthday album for Jeffrey Epstein. A federal judge in Florida dismissed the original complaint in April 2026, finding Trump had not plausibly alleged the “actual malice” required of public-figure plaintiffs. Trump refiled an amended version in May 2026, and the defendants have moved to dismiss it again.
What the Journal Reported
On July 17, 2025, Wall Street Journal reporters Khadeeja Safdar and Joe Palazzolo published an article describing a leather-bound book of letters that Ghislaine Maxwell had compiled for Epstein’s 50th birthday in January 2003, before Epstein’s first arrest in 2006. According to the Journal, which said it had reviewed the document, one page bore Trump’s name and included a drawing of a naked woman with a “squiggly ‘Donald’ below her waist, mimicking pubic hair.” The text on the page read: “Happy Birthday — and may every day be another wonderful secret.”1The New York Times. Trump Sues Wall Street Journal Over Epstein Report2The Wall Street Journal. Trump Jeffrey Epstein Birthday Letter
Trump denied writing the note the same day, calling it “a fake thing” and stating: “I never wrote a picture in my life. I don’t draw pictures of women. It’s not my language. It’s not my words.”3Politico. Trump Refiles Epstein Suit Against Wall Street Journal
Who Trump Sued and What He Claimed
Trump filed suit the next day, July 18, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida in Miami. The complaint sought at least $10 billion in damages and named Dow Jones (the Journal’s publisher), News Corp, Rupert Murdoch, News Corp CEO Robert Thomson, and reporters Safdar and Palazzolo.4PBS NewsHour. Trump Sues Wall Street Journal and Rupert Murdoch Over Story Reporting on Epstein Ties1The New York Times. Trump Sues Wall Street Journal Over Epstein Report
The complaint alleged the defendants “knowingly and recklessly” published “numerous false, defamatory, and disparaging statements” about Trump’s ties to Epstein, and argued that “no authentic letter or drawing exists.” It stated the defendants had “concocted this story to malign President Trump’s character and integrity.” According to the filing, Palazzolo emailed White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt on July 15, 2025, giving notice of the forthcoming article, and Trump’s counsel sent a cease-and-desist letter the same afternoon warning the information was false.5Courthouse News Service. Trump Complaint Against WSJ4PBS NewsHour. Trump Sues Wall Street Journal and Rupert Murdoch Over Story Reporting on Epstein Ties
Trump is represented by Alejandro Brito of Brito Law PLLC, a Coral Gables attorney who negotiated Trump’s $15 million settlement with ABC News in a separate matter.6Law.com International. Trump Sues Wall Street Journal in Federal Court in Miami Dow Jones responded that it had “full confidence in the rigor and accuracy of our reporting.”4PBS NewsHour. Trump Sues Wall Street Journal and Rupert Murdoch Over Story Reporting on Epstein Ties
The House Oversight Release Complicated the Picture
On September 8, 2025, the House Oversight Committee released documents obtained from the Epstein estate via subpoena. Democrats on the committee posted an image of the page bearing Trump’s name, writing that they had obtained “Trump’s birthday note to Jeffrey Epstein that the President said doesn’t exist.”7NPR. Trump Epstein Birthday Book The released page matched the Journal’s description, and reporters noted the signature “closely resembles” Trump’s signature on other documents where he signs only his first name.8CNN. Epstein Estate Birthday Book Documents House Oversight
The White House continued to maintain the document was not authentic. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said: “It’s very clear President Trump did not draw this picture, and he did not sign it.”9WTTW News. House Democrats Release Suggestive Letter to Jeffrey Epstein Purportedly Signed by Donald Trump
Why the First Complaint Was Dismissed
On April 13, 2026, U.S. District Judge Darrin P. Gayles dismissed the complaint in a 17-page opinion. He ruled that Trump came “nowhere close” to establishing actual malice, the standard set by the 1964 Supreme Court decision in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. Under that standard, a public figure suing for defamation must show the publisher knew a statement was false or acted with reckless disregard for whether it was true.10Politico. Trump Epstein Lawsuit WSJ Dismissed
Judge Gayles found Trump’s malice allegations “formulaic” and rejected the argument that Trump’s pre-publication denial to the defendants proved they harbored “serious doubts about the truth” of the report. He pointed to the Journal’s own reporting process as evidence cutting the other way: “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.”11Courthouse News Service. Judge Dismisses Trumps Defamation Lawsuit Against the Wall Street Journal
The judge did not decide whether Trump actually wrote the letter. He called authenticity “a question of fact that cannot be determined at this stage of the litigation.”11Courthouse News Service. Judge Dismisses Trumps Defamation Lawsuit Against the Wall Street Journal The court also found Trump’s team had not shown special damages. Because the dismissal was without prejudice, Trump could amend and refile.12The Guardian. Trump Lawsuit Against Wall Street Journal and Murdoch Dismissed
What the Refiled Complaint Added
On May 27, 2026, Trump refiled an amended complaint against the same defendants, again seeking $10 billion.13Reuters. Trump Refiles $10 Billion Defamation Suit Against WSJ Over Report on Epstein Ties The new version was seven pages longer and built around allegations designed to answer the judge’s actual-malice finding.
The centerpiece is a claim about a phone call Trump says he placed to Rupert Murdoch on July 15, 2025, two days before publication, telling him the story was untrue. According to the filing, Murdoch replied, “I will handle it,” which Trump says he “reasonably interpreted” to mean Murdoch believed him and would stop publication.14The Guardian. Trump Refiles $10Bn Lawsuit Against WSJ Over Report on Alleged Epstein Ties
The amended complaint also argues the reporters failed to explain how the letter was obtained or verified and that they should have included a denial from Ghislaine Maxwell. In a July 2025 interview with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, Maxwell said she did not recall receiving a letter or note from Trump for the birthday book, citing the passage of over two decades, and added: “I don’t remember who I did ask, but Epstein also asked some people himself directly.”15The New York Times. Trump Refiles WSJ Defamation Suit Seeking $10 Billion16ABC News. Ghislaine Maxwell on Epsteins 50th Birthday Book
The Pending Second Motion to Dismiss
On June 10, 2026, the defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint. Lead defense attorney George LeMieux, chairman of Gunster, Yoakley & Stewart and a former U.S. Senator from Florida, argued the revised filing “does not remedy any of the defects identified in the court’s dismissal order.”17Deadline. Trump Wall Street Journal Lawsuit Dismiss Motion
The defense repeated that “failure to investigate is not actual malice” and that the article itself showed the Journal investigated before publication, including three paragraphs devoted to Trump’s denial. The motion also contends the article “does not have a defamatory meaning,” arguing that a bawdy note sent to a friend would not damage Trump’s reputation as a matter of law.17Deadline. Trump Wall Street Journal Lawsuit Dismiss Motion
This time the defendants seek dismissal with prejudice, which would bar Trump from refiling. They have also requested attorney fees and costs under Florida’s anti-SLAPP statute and asked the judge to stay all discovery, including a deposition of Rupert Murdoch that Trump’s team had sought, until the motion is resolved.18Courthouse News Service. The Wall Street Journal Seeks Second Dismissal of Trump Defamation Lawsuit Whether Florida’s anti-SLAPP law applies in federal court has not been definitively resolved by the Eleventh Circuit.19Tallahassee Democrat. Florida Anti-SLAPP Law May Cost Trump Attorney Fees in WSJ Lawsuit
No hearing date or ruling on the second motion to dismiss has been publicly reported as of mid-2026.
The Actual Malice Standard at the Center of the Case
The actual malice standard from New York Times Co. v. Sullivan is a deliberately high bar, meant to prevent libel suits from chilling press coverage of public officials. In dismissing the first complaint, Judge Gayles emphasized that “actual malice requires more than a departure from reasonable journalistic standards” and that “a failure to investigate, standing on its own, does not indicate [its] presence.” A plaintiff must instead show the publisher “deliberately avoided investigating” the accuracy of the information.20Freedom Forum. Trump Wall Street Journal First Amendment Defamation
Lyrissa Lidsky, a First Amendment law professor at the University of Florida, said suits like this can serve a purpose beyond the courtroom, calling defamation cases “a symbolic way to contest the truth that has been written about you, even if you never end up making it to trial.”21Tallahassee Democrat. First Amendment Issues in Trumps Lawsuit Against Wall Street Journal
How This Case Fits Trump’s Broader Media Litigation
The Journal case is one of several large defamation actions Trump has brought against news organizations, and it is notable as the first defamation suit filed by a sitting U.S. president.22First Amendment Watch. Trump Suing for Defamation23Florida Bulldog. Brito, Tiny Gables Law Firm Makes Big Bucks Helping Trump Sue Media Giants24Associated Press. Paramount Will Pay $16 Million in Settlement With Trump Over 60 Minutes Interview25The Hill. Donald Trump New York Times Lawsuit26BBC. Trump BBC Lawsuit
Unlike those settlements, the Journal has not offered to resolve the case and has instead pressed each successive motion to dismiss on First Amendment grounds. Whether the amended complaint clears the actual-malice bar the first version could not now rests with Judge Gayles.