Judge Darrin P. Gayles dismissed Donald Trump's defamation lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal with prejudice on Saturday, ending a legal fight over the newspaper's reporting that Trump sent a "bawdy" birthday letter to Jeffrey Epstein in 2003. The dismissal is final — the case cannot be amended or refiled. The core legal problem was the same one that sinks most public-figure defamation suits: the actual malice standard set by New York Times v. Sullivan (1964). Trump needed to show the Journal either knew its reporting was false or published with reckless disregard for the truth. He failed twice. The court noted the newspaper's pre-publication outreach to Trump and its inclusion of his direct denials as evidence of responsible reporting practice. This was Trump's second attempt. An April dismissal had given him a chance to revise the complaint. The amended version still couldn't clear the bar. "Because this is President Trump's second attempt to allege his claims, the Court finds that dismissal with prejudice is appropriate," the ruling stated. The lawsuit was notable for naming Rupert Murdoch as a defendant — placing Trump in direct legal conflict with one of his most prominent media allies. Murdoch's News Corporation owns the Journal. Before the article's July 17, 2025 publication, Trump personally contacted Murdoch to try to stop it. That intervention did not work, and neither did the lawsuit. Trump's legal team issued a defiant statement claiming the president "will continue to press forward in his powerhouse lawsuit" — a characterization that sits awkwardly next to a with-prejudice dismissal. The statement's reference to continuing the fight against "all of the other defendants" suggests related litigation may continue elsewhere, but this particular case is dead. The Journal's article reported on letters sent to Epstein for a 50th birthday album, with one allegedly from Trump. The newspaper did not originally publish the image; the House oversight committee later released it in September after receiving it from Epstein's estate. Trump has maintained the drawing described in the report was fabricated. The pattern here is well-established: Trump files high-profile defamation suits against media organizations, the suits generate headlines and serve as political messaging, and courts dismiss them because the actual malice standard is an extraordinarily high bar by design. The legal system worked exactly as constitutional press protections intend.
