Judge dismisses Trump's $10 billion suit against Wall Street Journal

A federal judge in Florida has dismissed President Donald Trump's $10 billion defamation lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal. The ruling ends the second attempt by the White House to hold the newspaper liable for a story published in July.

U.S. District Judge Darrin Gayles found that the amended complaint contained the same legal weakness as the original filing. Trump failed to plausibly allege that the defendants published the story with actual malice. The judge determined that because this was the second attempt to file the claim, dismissal with prejudice was appropriate. This means Trump cannot file the same lawsuit again.

The dispute centers on a birthday book that Ghislaine Maxwell assembled for Jeffrey Epstein's 50th birthday in 2003. The Journal reported that the collection included a card from Trump, who was friends with Epstein at the time. The card featured a hand-drawn outline of a naked woman. The signature in the pubic area appeared to read Donald. A typewritten note on the card depicted an imaginary conversation with Epstein.

Trump denied authorship of the card. His legal team argued that the Journal made up the note and that no such document existed. The suit claimed the writers falsely represented that Trump drew the breasts and signed his first name below the waist. The complaint stated this caused overwhelming financial and reputational harm.

The White House maintains that the signature is not Trump's. Officials note that it differs from his distinctive full signature. Democrats have compiled documents showing Trump signed only his first name on various occasions over the past year. Those signatures appear very similar to the one on the card.

Epstein's estate released a copy of the card matching the Journal's description. The House Oversight Committee later publicly released the document. Trump and the White House continue to call the document a fake. The suit criticized the paper for not including an image of the card in the initial story. The attorneys argued this omission suggested no authentic letter existed.

The Journal's attorneys countered that sending a bawdy letter to a friend is not inherently defamatory. They noted the article emphasized that the friendship ended years before Epstein was charged with sex crimes. The attorneys argued the story was substantially true because of the public release of the card.

The paper also pointed out that it investigated the claim. The article informed readers that Trump decried the letter as a fake. The Journal stated it wrote to Maxwell, who is serving a 20 year prison sentence for sex trafficking, and included a comment from her attorney. In an interview with then-Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, Maxwell acknowledged assembling the book but said she could not remember if Trump contributed.

Judge Gayles ruled that Trump did not show the paper knew the statement was false or acted with reckless disregard. The dismissal with prejudice closes the case on the current facts. The decision stands as a final judgment on the claims presented in the amended complaint.