Judge Tosses Trump's $10B WSJ Epstein Letter Lawsuit
Is suing a newspaper over a stinging story an attempt to bully the press into silence or a fight to hold media giants accountable for smears?
Story
Above: American comedian and actress Rosie O'Donnell demands the full release of all unredacted Epstein files at New York City's Daryl Roth Theatre on July 21. Image credit: Bruce Glikas/Getty Images
The Facts
- U.S. District Judge Darrin Gayles dismissed President Donald Trump's lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal with prejudice on Saturday, meaning his defamation claim over the paper's reporting on a birthday letter to Jeffrey Epstein cannot be refiled.
- The 20-page ruling found Trump failed to show actual malice, with Gayles writing that the malice allegations were "conclusory, vague, sometimes inconsistent with the Article, and often irrelevant" to whether the defendants knew the statements were false.
- Gayles rejected the argument that the Journal should have withheld the story after Trump denied writing the letter, saying such a requirement would conflict with the First Amendment and would allow any public figure's denial to block unflattering coverage.
Sources Split
LEFT
CENTER
RIGHT
+1
+1
+1
+1
+1
ESTAB
CRIT
CENTER
PRO
ESTAB
The Spin
Anti-Trump narrative
Dragging a newspaper into court over reporting that stings is nothing more than an attempt to bully the press into silence. The First Amendment exists precisely so outlets can publish denials alongside the evidence and let readers judge for themselves. Two strikes and a permanent dismissal show the whole thing was always about intimidation, not truth.
Pro-Trump narrative
A bombshell accusation deserves proof, and withholding the supposed document from the public before splashing it across the front page is journalistic malpractice. Holding media giants accountable for smears is a fight worth continuing, and an appeal is more than warranted. Losing a procedural round doesn't make a false, bulls***t story true.
