WORLD

Trump loses second bid to sue Wall Street Journal over Epstein letter story

by
Park Ji-young
Published : Nov. 1, 2026 - 11:15:41
    • Copy Completed!

View Korean Original

Defamation suit over 'Epstein birthday letter' report dismissed

Judge rules Trump failed to prove 'actual malice'

In September last year, Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin displayed a large panel showing the Trump "Epstein letter" reported by the Wall Street Journal during a House Judiciary Committee hearing. [Reuters]
In September last year, Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin displayed a large panel showing the Trump "Epstein letter" reported by the Wall Street Journal during a House Judiciary Committee hearing. [Reuters]

A federal court has again dismissed Donald Trump's $10 billion defamation lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal over its reporting on a letter purportedly written by Trump to sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Judge Darrin Gayles of the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida in Miami ruled Saturday (local time) in favor of the Wall Street Journal and the other defendants, according to the AP and other news outlets.

The Wall Street Journal reported last year that a letter bearing Trump's name was included in a scrapbook compiled by friends to celebrate Epstein's 50th birthday in 2003. According to the Journal's reporting, the letter contained a birthday message written inside the outline of a hand-drawn nude female figure and bore Trump's signature.

Trump immediately denied writing the letter and filed a defamation lawsuit seeking damages, calling the Journal's reporting "false and malicious." The suit named the reporter who wrote the story, parent company News Corp, News Corp Honorary Chairman Rupert Murdoch, and the Journal's publisher Dow Jones.

Gayles dismissed the case on the grounds that Trump failed to prove "actual malice" — the legal standard required to sustain a defamation claim against a public figure.

The actual malice standard was established by the US Supreme Court in its landmark 1964 ruling in New York Times v. Sullivan. Under that standard, a plaintiff must show that the news organization either knew the report was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth.

Gayles said the Journal had conducted a "careful and detailed investigation" before publishing and had sought comment from Trump and other parties involved. Trump's legal team argued that the Journal should have killed the story once Trump denied the allegations, but the court rejected that argument as well.

"That is not what the actual malice standard requires, and it would be contrary to the First Amendment," Gayles said. The ruling made clear that a subject's denial alone is not sufficient to establish a news organization's malicious intent.

The dismissal was issued with prejudice, meaning Trump may appeal the ruling but cannot refile the same claims. Gayles had previously dismissed a similar lawsuit Trump brought against the Journal in April, citing insufficient evidence, but at that time allowed Trump to submit an amended complaint — which Trump did in May. The with-prejudice ruling now effectively forecloses further litigation over the Epstein reporting.

Epstein was first arrested on prostitution-related charges in 2006 and sentenced to 18 months in 2008, serving about 13 months before being released to house arrest in 2009. Epstein was detained again in July 2019 on charges of sex trafficking of minors and conspiracy, and was found dead in a jail cell in August of that year.


park.jiyeong@heraldcorp.com
This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.

MOST READ