Wall Street Journal says Trump libel suit should be dismissed 'once and for all'

Erik Larson, Bloomberg News on Jun 10, 2026

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

The Wall Street Journal asked a judge to dismiss President Donald Trump’s revised $10 billion defamation lawsuit over an article on his ties to Jeffrey Epstein, arguing that the new complaint isn’t an improvement on the original version that was tossed out.

Trump’s revised lawsuit still fails to explain how the article — about a “bawdy” birthday note he allegedly sent to Epstein decades ago — is defamatory, the Journal said in the filing Wednesday in Miami federal court.

Trump “has now had every opportunity to plead a defamation claim,” lawyers for the newspaper said. “His case remains groundless. This action should be dismissed once and for all.”

The news outlet, parent company News Corp. and Chairman Emeritus Rupert Murdoch — all defendants in the suit — asked the judge to dismiss the case “with prejudice” so Trump can’t file it again. They also want Trump to pay their legal fees.

The case is one of several the president has brought against the media in recent years, including multibillion-dollar defamation claims against the New York Times and the British Broadcasting Corp. The cases have led to widespread criticism that Trump is using his power to try to silence media criticism.

A representative for Trump’s legal team did not immediately return a message seeking comment.

The president’s first lawsuit against the Journal was dismissed in April for lacking sufficient claims that the story had been filed with “actual malice” toward Trump, meaning the publication knew the article was false or had recklessly disregarded the truth. It’s a high bar set for libel suits by public figures.

The judge gave Trump time to gather information to support his claims, but denied the president’s request to force the Journal to hand over internal documents and records about the disputed article. The Journal said Trump’s request “betrayed his inability to plead actual malice.”

Trump sued over a July 2025 story that said he’d sent a “bawdy” birthday note to the disgraced financier in 2003, typed within a sketched outline of a naked woman and signed with the president’s signature in the pubic area. The note ends with: “Happy Birthday — and may every day be another wonderful secret.” Trump has repeatedly claimed the note is fake.

“At the time of publication, defendants recklessly disregarded whether the defamatory statements were true and/or they purposefully avoided the discovery of the truth,” Trump’s lawyer Alejandro Brito wrote in the amended complaint, which was filed in May.

The newspaper argued in its filing that strong free-speech rights around matters of public concern are “essential to the common quest for truth and the vitality of society as a whole,” quoting a landmark Supreme Court case on the First Amendment.

“This lawsuit, brought by the President of the United States, subverts this principle,” the Journal said. Trump “has now had a full and fair opportunity to plead a defamation claim against defendants and has twice not done so,” the newspaper said.