Federal Judge Throws Out Trump’s Lawsuit Against WSJ. Why And What’s Next?

A federal judge has dismissed President Donald Trump’s $10 billion defamation lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal and media mogul Rupert Murdoch, dealing a significant setback in his legal fight over reporting tied to Jeffrey Epstein.

In a ruling Monday, U.S. District Judge Darrin P. Gayles found that Trump failed to plausibly allege that the Journal acted with “actual malice,” the high legal standard required in defamation cases involving public figures. The judge dismissed the complaint without prejudice, allowing Trump to amend and refile the lawsuit.

Trump’s lawsuit was filed in July, just days after the Journal published a report describing a sexually suggestive letter it said bore Trump’s signature and was included in a 2003 birthday album compiled for Epstein by Ghislaine Maxwell. According to the report, the letter featured a drawing of a naked woman and included the message, “Happy Birthday — and may every day be another wonderful secret.”

Trump has forcefully denied authoring the letter, insisting no such authentic document exists and calling the report “false, malicious, and defamatory.” In his original complaint, Trump argued the paper failed to provide proof of authenticity, did not include the full document at the time of publication, and could not verify how it was obtained.

Judge Gayles, however, wrote that Trump’s legal team did not meet the burden required to proceed with a defamation claim. Specifically, the complaint did not adequately show that the Journal knowingly published false information or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. The judge also pointed to the paper’s reporting process, noting that it sought comment from Trump prior to publication and included his denial in the story — a key factor in undercutting claims of actual malice.

Importantly, the court did not resolve whether the letter itself is authentic. Gayles made clear that questions about whether Trump authored the note or the nature of his relationship with Epstein are factual disputes that cannot be determined at this stage of litigation.

Separate forensic linguistic analysis previously reported by The Daily Wire has raised significant questions about the letter’s authenticity. Three independent AI systems, analyzing decades of Trump’s speeches, books, and written communications, concluded there was an “extremely low probability” that Trump authored the note. One report described a “fundamental and pervasive mismatch” between the letter and Trump’s known writing style, pointing to its abstract phrasing, theatrical dialogue format, and structured narrative elements.

The analyses found that the letter’s tone, including phrases like “may every day be another wonderful secret,” diverges sharply from Trump’s typically direct, blunt communication style. The presence of a scripted, almost stage-like format featuring imagined dialogue between “Donald” and “Jeffrey” was also flagged as highly inconsistent with Trump’s known patterns of speech and writing.

Even when prompted to argue in favor of Trump’s authorship, the AI systems were unable to produce strong linguistic evidence supporting that conclusion. Instead, they pointed primarily to circumstantial factors, such as Trump’s past association with Epstein, while maintaining that the writing itself did not match his established idiolect.

Despite those findings, the Journal has stood by its reporting, and its legal team argued in court that the article was accurate and therefore not defamatory. Attorneys also contended that the claims described in the report were not inconsistent with Trump’s public persona, further weakening the defamation argument.

The letter itself later became public after congressional investigators obtained Epstein’s so-called “birthday book” from his estate, adding another layer of scrutiny to the controversy. The White House has pushed back aggressively, with Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt stating that it is “very clear” Trump neither drew nor signed the image described in the report.

Looking ahead, Trump has made clear he intends to continue the legal fight. In a post on Truth Social, he emphasized that the ruling was procedural rather than final, writing: “Our powerful case against The Wall Street Journal, and other defendants, was asked to be re-filed by the Judge. It is not a termination, it is a suggested re-filing, and we will be, as per the Order, re-filing an updated lawsuit on or before April 27th.” His legal team has similarly indicated plans to submit an amended complaint, setting up the next phase of what could become a prolonged legal battle.

The dismissal marks a notable moment in Trump’s broader effort to challenge media coverage through the courts, particularly as Epstein-related disclosures continue to reverberate through political and legal circles. While Trump’s legal team has vowed to refile what it called a “powerhouse lawsuit,” the ruling underscores the steep legal hurdles public figures face when attempting to prove defamation against major news organizations.