Trump Lawsuit Against Wall Street Journal Dismissed Over Epstein Birthday Book
Judge Dismisses Trump’s Lawsuit Against Wall Street Journal Over Epstein Birthday Book
A United States federal judge has dismissed President Donald Trump’s defamation lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal over its report about an alleged birthday letter linked to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
US District Judge Darrin Gayles issued the ruling on Saturday, October 31, 2026. He concluded that Trump’s amended complaint failed to establish that the newspaper acted with actual malice when publishing its report.
The lawsuit sought at least $10 billion in damages. Trump accused the newspaper, its parent company, News Corp, and other defendants of publishing false and damaging information about him.
The latest decision represents another major setback for Trump’s legal battle against the newspaper. However, his legal team has indicated that he intends to continue fighting the case through an appeal.
Why Trump Sued The Wall Street Journal
The dispute began in July 2025, when The Wall Street Journal published an investigation into a birthday book prepared for Epstein’s 50th birthday in 2003.
The newspaper reported that the collection included a sexually suggestive letter bearing Trump’s name. The letter reportedly featured typewritten text surrounded by an outline of a naked woman.
It also contained language referring to a birthday greeting and shared secrets.
Trump strongly denied writing or signing the letter. He described the newspaper’s report as false and defamatory and argued that it damaged his reputation.
He subsequently filed a lawsuit against the Journal, its publisher Dow Jones, media executive Rupert Murdoch, reporters involved in the story and other defendants.
Trump initially sought $20 billion in damages before pursuing an amended complaint seeking at least $10 billion.
The case became part of a wider dispute between Trump and major news organisations over reporting he has criticised.
Judge Says Trump Failed to Prove Actual Malice
In his ruling, Judge Gayles said Trump’s amended complaint did not meet the legal standard required to establish actual malice.
Under US law, public figures generally must show that a publisher knew a statement was false or acted with reckless disregard for whether it was true.
The judge found that Trump’s allegations were vague and insufficient to demonstrate that the newspaper knowingly published false information.
Gayles also questioned arguments that attempted to identify weaknesses in the newspaper’s investigation.
The court noted that the Journal had sought comments from Trump and other relevant people before publication. The newspaper also included Trump’s denial in its reporting.
The judge explained that a public figure’s denial does not, by itself, establish that a news organisation acted with actual malice.
The decision relied on legal principles established by the US Supreme Court in its landmark 1964 ruling in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. That decision established a demanding standard for public figures bringing defamation claims.
Lawsuit Dismissed for the Second Time
This is the second time Judge Gayles has dismissed Trump’s lawsuit over the disputed report.
In April 2026, the judge rejected the original complaint because it failed to adequately establish actual malice. However, that dismissal allowed Trump to submit an amended complaint.
Trump’s legal team subsequently filed a revised case, attempting to address the court’s concerns.
The judge has now dismissed that amended complaint with prejudice.
This means Trump cannot simply file the same claims again in the same court. He can, however, challenge the decision through the appeals process.
The ruling does not establish who wrote the disputed birthday letter. Instead, it addresses whether Trump’s allegations were legally sufficient to support his defamation claims against the defendants.
Trump Team Promises to Continue Legal Fight
Following the decision, a spokesperson for Trump’s legal team said the president would continue pursuing the lawsuit against the newspaper and the other defendants.
The legal team maintains that the reporting was false and damaged Trump’s reputation.
Dow Jones, the publisher of The Wall Street Journal, welcomed the dismissal and defended the newspaper’s reporting standards.
The case has attracted significant attention because it involves the president, one of the world’s most influential media organisations and material associated with Epstein.
What the Ruling Means for the Epstein Controversy
The dismissal does not settle every question surrounding the disputed birthday book or the identity of the letter’s author.
It also does not amount to a finding that every detail in the Journal’s report was correct. The judge’s decision focused on the legal requirements for bringing a defamation claim.
Epstein, a wealthy financier convicted of sex offences, died in a New York jail in 2019 while awaiting trial on federal sex-trafficking charges.
His connections to prominent figures have continued to attract public scrutiny.
For now, the court ruling gives The Wall Street Journal a significant legal victory. Trump’s next move is expected to centre on whether an appeal can overturn the dismissal.
About the Author
