# Judge Dismisses Trump’s $10 Billion Defamation Lawsuit Against WSJ Court rejects claims of actual malice regarding coverage of Jeffrey Epstein birthday note. - **Source:** [NYT > Business](https://www.nytimes.com/section/business) - **Published:** 2026-10-31 - **Topic:** [Business](https://brifing.si/c/business) - **Original article:** - **On Brifing:** https://brifing.si/s/0dcecdfb-e2e2-4239-8ce5-d2297a17e4a8 ## Legal Action Dismissed A federal judge has officially dismissed the ten billion dollar defamation lawsuit filed by Donald Trump against The Wall Street Journal. The legal challenge centered on a specific article published by the outlet regarding a birthday note addressed to Jeffrey Epstein. This ruling marks a significant conclusion to the high-profile litigation process. ## Focus on Defamation Claims The core of the lawsuit alleged that the publication acted with actual malice when reporting on the controversial birthday note. Trump argued that the narrative presented by the newspaper was defamatory in nature. However, the court found the arguments insufficient to meet the high legal threshold required for such defamation claims. ## Second Attempt Failure This legal action represented the second attempt by the former president to pursue the publication for its reporting on the matter. Previous efforts to establish that the media organization acted with malicious intent failed to gain traction in court. The judge maintained consistency by rejecting these repeated claims during the current proceedings. ## Actual Malice Standard In United States defamation law, proving actual malice requires demonstrating that a publisher knew information was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. The court determined that the plaintiff failed to provide evidence meeting this rigorous standard. Consequently, the legal basis for the ten billion dollar demand was deemed invalid. ## Media Reporting Context The article in question examined the connections and communications involving Jeffrey Epstein, a figure central to numerous investigations. The Wall Street Journal maintained its editorial stance throughout the legal battle. By dismissing the case, the court upheld the protections afforded to media organizations when reporting on matters of significant public interest. ## Judicial Review Process The presiding judge evaluated the merits of the defamation allegations against established legal precedents. The court scrutinized the specific language used in the article to determine if it crossed the line into actionable defamation. Finding no evidence of intentional falsehood, the judge concluded that the lawsuit lacked the necessary legal foundation. ## Implications for Media Outlets This dismissal reinforces the existing legal framework that protects journalists from massive financial liability when covering sensitive political and social figures. By rejecting the ten billion dollar claim, the court prevents the use of litigation as a tool to suppress investigative reporting. It serves as a clear reminder of current defamation standards. ## Conclusion of Litigation With the dismissal of this case, the legal dispute between the former president and the newspaper reaches a definitive end. The outcome highlights the difficulty of winning defamation suits against major media institutions in the United States. Future legal strategies regarding similar reporting will likely face the same stringent judicial scrutiny. ## Sources covering this story - https://www.nytimes.com/2026/10/31/business/media/trump-wsj-defamation-suit-10-billion.html — --- _Summary written by Brifing from the original reporting. Copyright in the original article belongs to its publisher; read the full piece at the link above._