Judge dismisses Trump's $10B lawsuit against WSJ, Murdoch over reporting on ties to Epstein

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: AP

Updated 10:18 AM EDT, April 13, 2026


WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge dismissed President Donald Trump’s $10 billion defamation lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal and Rupert Murdoch on Monday over a story on his ties to Jeffrey Epstein. U.S. District Judge Darrin P. Gayles in Florida wrote in the order that Trump had failed to make the argument that the article was published with the intent to be malicious, but gave the president a chance to file an amended complaint.

Trump filed the lawsuit in July, following up on a promise to sue the paper almost immediately after it put a new spotlight on his well-documented relationship with Epstein by publishing an article that described a sexually suggestive letter that the newspaper said bore Trump’s signature and was included in a 2003 album compiled for Epstein’s 50th birthday. The letter was subsequently released publicly by Congress, which subpoenaed the records from Epstein’s estate. Trump denied writing it, calling the story “false, malicious, and defamatory.”

Attorneys for the newspaper and Murdoch had asked Gayles to rule that the article’s statements were true and therefore couldn’t be defamatory, but the judge wrote that “whether President Trump was the author of the Letter or Epstein’s friend are questions of fact that cannot be determined at this stage of the litigation,” Gayles wrote.

The ruling marks yet another blow in the Trump administration’s efforts to manage fallout over its release of the Epstein files and the president’s attempts to use the legal system to chill reporting he finds critical of him.

Read more: https://apnews.com/article/trump-murdoch-wall-street-journal-lawsuit-40e7aba7731db9e8800488038cb92a66

---

Link to ORDER (PDF) - https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.693830/gov.uscourts.flsd.693830.59.0_2.pdf

Obama judge + first openly gay black judge. Also a judge in Loose Cannon's district.

This is related to the publication of this -




REFERENCES

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143497764
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143498089
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143498638
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143498908
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143499401
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143503290
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143535312
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143614611


Article updated.

Original article -

Updated 9:52 AM EDT, April 13, 2026


WASHINGTON (AP) -- A federal judge dismissed President Donald Trump's $10 billion defamation lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal and Rupert Murdoch on Monday over a story on his ties to Jeffrey Epstein. U.S. District Judge Darrin P. Gayles in Florida wrote in the order that Trump had failed to make the argument that the article was published with the intent to be malicious, but gave the president a chance to file an amended complaint.

Trump filed the lawsuit in July, following up on a promise to sue the paper almost immediately after it put a new spotlight on his well-documented relationship with Epstein by publishing an article that described a sexually suggestive letter that the newspaper said bore Trump's signature and was included in a 2003 album compiled for Epstein's 50th birthday.

The letter was subsequently released publicly by Congress, which subpoenaed the records from Epstein's estate.

The ruling marks yet another blow in the Trump administration's efforts to manage fallout over its release of the Epstein files and the president's attempts to use the legal system to chill reporting he find critical of him.

[Ray Bruns]

1. "but gave the president a chance to file an amended complaint"

Why? Fucking why? There will be no more evidence in the future than there is now. It should have been dismissed with prejudice.
This just keeps the harassment going.

[BumRushDaShow]

2. It's GOP infighting

that will waste Murdoch's money.

[melm00se]

3. Because that is the law supported by prior court rulings

Trump's filing did not include facts to show actual malice and because of this:

“[a] dismissal based on the failure to plead facts giving rise to an inference of actual malice should be without prejudice[,] and the
plaintiff should have the opportunity to amend his complaint.”

Additionally, past rulings have indicated that if the plaintiff fails to plead actual malice a second time, then the court can bounce it with prejudice.

The judge is following the law and past rulings to a T to prevent getting overturned on appeal.

[onenote]

4. +1

[LetMyPeopleVote]

5. MaddowBlog-Federal judge rejects Trump's dubious defamation lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal

The demise of the president’s case is a demonstration of the benefits of fighting back — and of the folly of appeasement.

As Trump’s foolish defamation case against the Wall Street Journal gets thrown out of court, there’s a larger lesson here:

Those who push back against his abuses — news organizations, law firms, universities, et al. — succeed, while those who try appeasement fail.
www.ms.now/rachel-maddo...

— Steve Benen (@stevebenen.com) 2026-04-13T14:16:39.944Z

https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/judge-dismisses-trump-wall-street-journal-epstein-case

Last summer, after The Wall Street Journal reported on Donald Trump’s alleged 2003 birthday letter to Jeffrey Epstein, the president responded with unsubtle threats. “President Trump will be suing The Wall Street Journal, NewsCorp, and Mr. Murdoch, shortly,” he wrote online, referring to himself in the third person for reasons unknown....

In mid-July, the president did, in fact, file the defamation suit, seeking a jury trial and a judgment of at least $10 billion. At least for now, it now appears he will get neither. The Journal reported:

A federal judge on Monday dismissed President Trump’s defamation lawsuit against the publisher of The Wall Street Journal.

U.S. District Judge Darrin Gayles, based in Miami, Fla., ruled Trump hadn’t made a valid legal claim that he was defamed by an article about a letter to financier Jeffrey Epstein bearing Trump’s name.

“Because President Trump has not plausibly alleged that defendants published the article with actual malice, both Counts must be dismissed,” the jurist wrote.....

The Trump campaign’s 2020 case against CNN failed. Trump’s 2021 case against The New York Times failed. Trump’s 2023 case against journalist Bob Woodward failed. The Trump campaign’s case against The Washington Post failed. Trump’s so-called class-action lawsuit against social media giants also failed. (Last year, Trump filed a $15 billion civil suit against The New York Times, which was thrown out four days later, not because it lacked merit, but because a federal judge found that the president’s lawyers’ court filing was simply too ridiculous.)

Americans have never before had a president who sued independent news organizations or individual journalists for publishing reports the White House disapproved of, but we have also never before had a president lose so many civil cases while in office......

Meanwhile, news organizations that stood up for themselves and resisted the ridiculous attempts at intimidation have prevailed.

Let this be a lesson to the larger political world: The only way to lose in a fight against Trump is to pursue a course rooted in appeasement. It’s true when it comes to law firms; it’s true when it comes to higher education; and it’s true in his court fights against news organizations.

The cases brought by trump were all very stupid and deserved to be dismissed. I believe that the attorneys who brought these cases should worry about bar sanctions. Only an unethical or incompetent attorney would file these cases.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

6. More flying ketchup bottles