A federal judge in Miami dismissed President Donald Trump’s defamation lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal (and related defendants including its parent company Dow Jones and Rupert Murdoch) on April 13, 2026, ruling that the complaint failed to adequately plead the “actual malice” standard required for public figures.
U.S. District Judge Darrin P. Gayles issued a 17-page order dismissing the case without prejudice, meaning Trump’s legal team can file an amended complaint by April 27, 2026. The judge emphasized that the original filing relied on “conclusory” and “formulaic” allegations of malice and fell short of the high legal bar established by New York Times v. Sullivan.
Trump’s Response on Truth Social In a post on Truth Social shortly after the ruling, President Trump stated:
“Our powerful case against The Wall Street Journal, and other defendants, was asked to be re-filed by the Judge. It is not a termination, it is a suggested re-filing, and we will be, as per the Order, re-filing an updated lawsuit on or before April 27th.”
A spokesman for Trump’s legal team echoed this, saying:
“President Trump will follow Judge Gayles’s ruling and guidance to refile this powerhouse lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal and all of the other Defendants. The President will continue to hold accountable those who traffic in Fake News to mislead the American People.”
Background on the Lawsuit Trump filed the roughly $10 billion lawsuit in July 2025, shortly after The Wall Street Journal published its July 17, 2025, article. The story reported on a leather-bound birthday album compiled by Ghislaine Maxwell for Jeffrey Epstein’s 50th birthday in 2003. It included a sexually suggestive letter – allegedly bearing Trump’s signature and featuring a drawing of a naked woman – that reportedly contained typewritten text ending with “Happy Birthday – and may every day be another wonderful secret.”
Trump has consistently denied authoring or signing the letter, calling it fake. White House officials, including press secretary Karoline Leavitt and deputy chief of staff Taylor Budowich, publicly rejected the story in September 2025 after additional materials surfaced.
Judge’s Reasoning Judge Gayles noted that The Wall Street Journal had sought comment from Trump (who denied involvement), the Justice Department (no response), and the FBI (declined to comment) before publication. The article itself included Trump’s denial. The judge wrote that these facts undermined claims that the newspaper ignored contradictory evidence or acted with reckless disregard for the truth—the core elements of actual malice.
The court declined at this stage to rule on whether the statements in the article were actually true or false, calling those factual disputes better suited for later proceedings if an amended complaint is filed.
A Dow Jones spokesperson told multiple outlets: “We are pleased with the judge’s decision to dismiss this complaint. We stand behind the reliability, rigor and accuracy of The Wall Street Journal’s reporting.”
The case remains ongoing pending any amended filing. This dismissal is procedural and does not resolve the underlying factual dispute over the authenticity of the 2003 letter.
