New York, USA
In a scathing rebuke of what he called an “improper and impermissible” legal filing, a federal judge today dismissed Donald Trump’s $15 billion defamation lawsuit against The New York Times. The unprecedented ruling did not address the truthfulness of the allegations but instead targeted the procedural and stylistic failings of the complaint itself. This dismissal represents a significant and highly public setback for Trump’s legal strategy against the media, as the judge delivered a cutting critique, stating that a lawsuit is not “a megaphone for public relations or a podium for a passionate oration at a political rally.” The judge has granted Trump’s legal team 28 days to refile the action in a more concise and professional manner.
The 85-page lawsuit, which sought a staggering $15 billion in damages, was dismissed by U.S. District Court Judge Steven Merryday, an appointee of former President George H.W. Bush. In his four-page order, Merryday ruled that the complaint violated Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which requires a “short and plain statement of the claim.” The judge noted that the lawsuit, which contained only two simple counts of defamation, was filled with “vituperation and invective” and consumed 85 pages, with the first defamation count not appearing until page 80. The judge’s order said that the filing was an “improper and impermissible place for the tedious and burdensome aggregation of prospective evidence.”
Key Points
* Lawsuit Dismissed on Procedural Grounds: A federal judge has dismissed Donald Trump’s $15 billion defamation lawsuit against The New York Times, ruling that the complaint was “improper and impermissible” due to its excessive length and unprofessional language.
* Scathing Judicial Rebuke: Judge Steven Merryday’s ruling called the lawsuit a “megaphone for public relations” and said it was filled with “vituperation and invective,” in a highly unusual public critique of a president’s legal filing.
* Re-Filing Option Provided: The judge did not rule on the merits of the defamation claims but has given Trump’s legal team 28 days to file a new, amended complaint that must not exceed 40 pages.
* The Lawsuit’s Target: The lawsuit targeted a book, “Lucky Loser: How Donald Trump Squandered His Father’s Fortune and Created the Illusion of Success,” as well as several articles by New York Times reporters, accusing them of “maliciously” creating a false narrative about his business and celebrity.
* New York Times Stance: A spokesperson for the newspaper welcomed the ruling, calling the original lawsuit a “political document” and reiterating that the publication will not be “deterred by intimidation tactics” in its pursuit of independent reporting.
The lawsuit had accused The New York Times, its reporters Susanne Craig and Russ Buettner, and publisher Penguin Random House of publishing “malicious accusations” against Trump. The complaint took aim at reporting on his business dealings and his pre-presidency starring role in the television show, “The Apprentice.” The lawsuit claimed the Times had “maliciously peddled the fact-free narrative” that a television producer, Mark Burnett, was responsible for turning Trump into a celebrity. It also challenged a series of articles that delved into his financial history and family business. The lawsuit was widely seen by legal experts as a public relations maneuver rather than a serious legal action.
In a statement following the ruling, a spokesperson for The New York Times said, “We welcome the judge’s quick ruling, which recognized that the complaint was a political document rather than a serious legal filing.” The statement continued, “This lawsuit has no merit. It lacks any legitimate legal claims and instead is an attempt to stifle and discourage independent reporting. The New York Times will not be deterred by intimidation tactics.” This sentiment was echoed by others in the media and legal community, who have long criticized what they see as a concerted effort by political figures to use the courts to silence and intimidate journalists.
For their part, a spokesperson for Trump’s legal team vowed to “continue to hold the Fake News accountable through this powerhouse lawsuit against The New York Times, its reporters, and Penguin Random House, in accordance with the judge’s direction on logistics.” The statement indicates that Trump’s team plans to meet the judge’s new requirements and continue the legal battle, albeit in a more streamlined fashion.
While the judge’s ruling was based on procedural grounds rather than a decision on the merits of the case, it sends a powerful message about the proper use of the judicial system. Judge Merryday’s strong words remind all litigants, regardless of their position, that courtrooms are not for political grandstanding or personal attacks. His order ensures that this high-profile legal action, and any future filings, will proceed “in a professional and dignified manner.” The new complaint, which will be submitted within the next month, will likely focus more narrowly on specific allegations of defamation rather than on the broad and often laudatory content that the judge found so objectionable.
