U.S. District Judge Darrin P. Gayles dismissed Trump's $10 billion defamation lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal and Rupert Murdoch on April 13, 2026, over a story on Trump's ties to Jeffrey Epstein.
The defendants had argued that Trump failed to adequately allege that the statements were false or defamatory, actual malice, or special damages for his per quod claim. Judge Gayles ruled on narrower grounds: because Trump “has not plausibly alleged that Defendants published the Article with actual malice, both Counts must be dismissed,” and the defamation per quod claim also failed “for failure to allege special damages.” He declined to decide whether the article was true or defamatory: “Because the Court finds that the Complaint fails to adequately allege actual malice, it declines to address these issues at this juncture.” The dismissal was without prejudice, and the order gave Trump until April 27, 2026 to file an amended complaint.
Trump responded on Truth Social, claiming the decision “is not a termination” but a “suggested re-filing” of his “powerful case,” saying he would refile by April 27. His first amended complaint, in the same case, was docketed on May 27, 2026.
The letter in question showed the silhouette of a woman containing a poem addressed to Epstein, in which Trump allegedly wrote: “a pal is a wonderful thing. Happy Birthday — and may every day be another wonderful secret. Donald J. Trump.” There is also a signature at the bottom of the woman's figure, potentially mimicking pubic hair, reading simply “Donald.”
Trump filed the lawsuit in July 2025, following up on a promise to sue almost immediately after the WSJ published the story. The letter was subsequently released publicly by Congress, which subpoenaed the records from Epstein's estate.
Dow Jones (which publishes the Journal) said they were “pleased” with the decision, adding: “We stand behind the reliability, rigor and accuracy of The Wall Street Journal's reporting.”
Correction (October 27, 2026): this entry presented two of the defendants' arguments, that Trump had not alleged the article was false or defamatory, as findings by the judge. The order, ECF 59, dismissed for failure to plead actual malice (and, for the per quod count, special damages) and “declines to address” truth and defamatory meaning. The summary and key facts have been corrected, a New Republic link that led to an unrelated story was dropped, and the May 2026 filing is now described as the first amended complaint in the same case, docketed May 27.
Update (October 31, 2026): Judge Gayles dismissed the amended complaint with prejudice on October 31, CNBC reported, in a 20-page ruling holding that Trump again failed to plausibly allege that the Journal and the other defendants acted with actual malice. This account rests on CNBC's report; the tracker has not yet reviewed the order itself. “As with his first attempt, he has failed,” the ruling reads, according to CNBC. It continues, “Grasping at straws, the Amended Complaint attempts to manufacture flaws with the investigation,” and says the Journal conducted a “thoughtful and detailed investigation.”
Gayles rejected each of the amended complaint's arguments, including that the Journal did not adequately investigate the letter, omitted relevant details, and published after Trump and his representatives denied it was authentic. Accepting the last, he said, would effectively let public figures block unfavorable reporting, which “runs afoul of the First Amendment.” He did not decide whether Trump wrote the letter. A dismissal with prejudice means Trump cannot file another amended complaint in the district court, but a spokesman for his legal team told CNBC the president plans to appeal: “President Trump will continue to press forward in his powerhouse lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal and all of the other defendants.” Representatives for the Journal and Murdoch did not immediately respond to CNBC.