Federal Judge Dismisses Trump's $10 Billion Defamation Suit Against WSJ and Murdoch With Prejudice
Photo: The New York TimesA federal judge in Miami on Saturday dismissed President Donald Trump's amended $10 billion defamation lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal and media owner Rupert Murdoch with prejudice. Judge Darrin Gayles ruled that Trump had not plausibly alleged the defendants published the article with actual malice. The suit concerned a Journal story saying Trump sent a "bawdy" 50th birthday letter in 2003 to Jeffrey Epstein, which Trump has strongly denied sending. Gayles wrote that, as with Trump's first attempt, he had failed.
The ruling came roughly six months after Gayles first dismissed the suit. Because the dismissal is with prejudice, Trump cannot file another amended version in the district court. A spokesman for Trump's legal team said the president plans to appeal and will keep pressing the case. Spokespeople or lawyers for the Journal and Murdoch did not immediately respond to CNBC's request for comment.
The left-leaning New York Times leads with the dismissal itself, in a headline saying the judge tossed the suit. Its excerpt describes the case as focused on the article about the birthday note and presents it as the president's second attempt to show the publication acted with actual malice. The excerpt available does not include Trump's response or the appeal plans. Alternative outlets add detail the Times excerpt lacks. CNBC reports the with-prejudice ruling, the six-month gap, the appeal pledge and the Trump team's statement about holding those who spread "Fake News" accountable. Reason, a libertarian outlet, leads with Gayles's own opinion, which opens with a long First Amendment passage from Justice Brandeis, quoted in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, on free speech and the actual-malice standard for public figures. Right-leaning outlets had not reported this story at the time of writing, while the left-leaning and alternative outlets had.
How the sides differ Left sources stress the suit's second failed attempt to show actual malice; alternative sources add Trump's planned appeal and the judge's First Amendment reasoning; right sources have not covered it.
Headline, comparison and summary written by AI from the articles below. AI can make mistakes, so check the original articles before relying on a detail.
The New York Times leads with the judge throwing out the suit, describing it as Trump's second attempt to prove actual malice over the Epstein birthday-note article. The excerpt features no direct voices.
CNBC reports the with-prejudice dismissal, the judge's actual-malice finding and a Trump spokesman's appeal pledge. Reason centers the judge's opinion and its First Amendment and Sullivan reasoning.
Not covering this story. None of the right-leaning outlets Crosswire tracks has reported it yet. What one side leaves out can be as telling as what the others report.