A federal judge in Miami on Saturday dismissed President Donald Trump’s $10 billion defamation lawsuit against Rupert Murdoch and The Wall Street Journal, concluding the president failed to show the news organization acted with actual malice when reporting on an alleged birthday card sent to Jeffrey Epstein.
U.S. District Judge Darrin Gayles tossed the amended complaint with prejudice, meaning the decision is final in the district court and cannot be refiled. Gayles concluded that Trump’s legal team attempted to fabricate deficiencies in the newspaper’s reporting rather than presenting plausible legal arguments, CNBC reported.
“Grasping at straws, the Amended Complaint attempts to manufacture flaws with the investigation,” Gayles wrote in his 20-page decision. The judge emphasized that the Journal undertook a “thoughtful and detailed investigation” and that simply publishing over a subject’s denials does not amount to reckless disregard for truth.
The Disputed 2003 Birthday Note
The lawsuit centered on a July 2025 story published by the Journal detailing an album assembled in 2003 for Epstein’s 50th birthday by his associate Ghislaine Maxwell, years before Epstein’s initial criminal arrest. The piece described a note containing the outline of a naked woman with Trump’s first name signed below the waist, along with typed text framing the sketch.
Trump has vehemently disputed the article, stating he never created or sent any such note. In remarks previously reported by the Journal, Trump stated, “I never wrote a picture in my life. I don’t draw pictures of women,” adding that “it’s not my language.”
The court did not make a factual finding on whether Trump penned the document. However, Gayles pointed out that the newspaper clearly presented Trump’s denials in its reporting. Allowing public figures to claim defamation merely because a news outlet published a story after receiving a denial would undermine press freedoms protected by the First Amendment, the judge wrote.
Legal Precedent and Actual Malice
Gayles had previously dismissed Trump’s initial complaint roughly six months earlier, in April, before granting leave to amend. In evaluating the revised filing, Gayles held that Trump failed to clear the high constitutional standard established under the Supreme Court’s 1964 landmark precedent, New York Times Co. v. Sullivan.
Under that standard, public figures must demonstrate that a publisher acted with actual malice, meaning the organization knew a claim was false or published with reckless disregard for its accuracy. Gayles determined that Trump’s claims of malice were vague, conclusory and unsupported by the record.
The newspaper’s attorneys had countered that the reporting was substantially true, pointing out that Epstein’s estate later provided a copy of the card to the House Oversight Committee, which made it public, NBC News reported. Epstein died by suicide in a Manhattan jail in August 2019 while awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges. If you or someone you know is in crisis, call or text 988.
Appeal Planned Amid Media Clashes
A spokesperson for Trump’s legal team said the president intends to challenge the dismissal in an appellate court.
“President Trump will continue to press forward in his powerhouse lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal and all of the other defendants,” the spokesman said in a statement provided to CNBC. “The President will continue to hold those who mislead the American People with Fake News and smears accountable for their actions.”
Representatives for Murdoch and the newspaper did not immediately comment on the ruling, according to CNBC. Filings concerning legal fees must be submitted within 30 days, TheWrap reported.
The dismissal is the latest development in a string of contentious legal fights between Trump and major press organizations. A federal judge on Oct. 22 instructed Trump to sit for a deposition by Dec. 11 in a separate $10 billion defamation case against the BBC, while multiple news organizations continue to challenge the administration over press credentials.
