By Anjali Sharma
WASHINGTON: US federal judge on Sunday has permanently ended Donald Trump’s defamation lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal and its owner, Rupert Murdoch. It closes a case that began with a single news story about a birthday card sent to Jeffrey Epstein, media reported.
Trump sued a day after the story ran, hoping to silence the Wall Street Journal. Instead, a Miami courtroom has now closed the book on his case for good.
A birthday card, a $10bn lawsuit and threw two rulings from the same judge.
Judge Darrin Gayles of the US District Court in Miami threw out the case “with prejudice.” That phrase matters. It means Trump cannot bring the same claim again in the lower court.
Gayles said Trump failed to show “actual malice.” This is the legal bar a public figure must clear to win a defamation case in the United States. The judge called the claims of malice vague and conclusory. Also, he said some were inconsistent with the article itself.
He suggested Trump’s lawyers had tried to manufacture flaws in the paper’s investigation. In his words, Trump was grasping at straws.
The ruling is the second dismissal in this case. The first came in April. This one is final in the trial court.
The standard came from a 1964 Supreme Court case, New York Times v. Sullivan. It protects the press when it reports on public officials and public figures.
To win, a public figure must prove two things. First, the statement was false. Second, the publisher knew it was false, or showed reckless disregard for the truth.
A mistake is not enough. Even sloppy reporting is not enough. The plaintiff must show the publisher had real doubts and went ahead anyway. That is a hard test to meet. It is meant to be hard.
Trump has long said he wants this standard changed. The ruling shows it is still in force.
On July 17, 2025, The Wall Street Journal published an exclusive. It described a birthday note sent to Jeffrey Epstein for his 50th birthday in 2003.
The note was part of a book of letters from friends and well-known people.
The British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell reportedly collected them. Maxwell is now serving a 20-year prison sentence for her role in Epstein’s sex-trafficking scheme.
The note attributed to Trump had typed text. A hand-drawn outline of a curvy woman framed the text. Trump’s signature sat near the bottom of the drawing.
A copy of the letter was later released by the House Oversight Committee. Democrats on the committee made it public in September 2025.
Trump denied writing the words. He denied signing the note. He denied drawing the picture.
On Truth Social, he said the paper had printed a fake letter. He called the coverage false, malicious and defamatory.
The Journal had asked him for comment before publishing. It printed his denial in the article.
Judge Gayles pointed to this in his April ruling. He said it let readers decide for themselves.
Trump sued on July 18, 2025. That was one day after the story ran. He filed in federal court in Miami.
He asked for more than $10 billion in damages. And, he said the story caused overwhelming financial and reputational harm.
The defendants were many. They included Dow Jones, the paper’s publisher, and News Corp, its parent company. Murdoch was named personally. So was News Corp chief executive Robert Thomson. Two Journal reporters who worked on the story were also named.
The complaint said the paper acted knowingly and recklessly. It said the defendants published false and disparaging statements.
Judge Gayles dismissed the case on April 13, 2026. He ruled that Trump had not plausibly alleged actual malice.
He noted how the paper handled the story. Reporters contacted Trump before publication.
They also reached out to the Justice Department and the FBI. The judge treated this as normal journalistic practice.
That ruling was “without prejudice.” This gave Trump a way back in. He had until April 27 to file an amended complaint.
Dow Jones welcomed the decision. A spokesperson said the company stood behind the accuracy and rigor of its reporting.
Trump’s team said it would follow the judge’s guidance. It promised to refile what it called a powerhouse lawsuit.
Trump filed an amended complaint on May 27, 2026. It tried to fix the weakness the judge had named.
The new filing leaned on a few points. It said the Journal was reckless because it did not show how its reporters got and checked the letter. Also, it questioned how deep the reporting went.
It made a claim about Murdoch too. That said Trump told Murdoch the letter was fake. It said Murdoch replied that he would handle it. Trump read this as a sign the story would not run.
The complaint also cited Maxwell. It said she told federal officials, under penalty of perjury, that she had no memory of Trump sending a birthday note.
Judge Gayles was not persuaded. His final ruling said the malice claims were conclusory. He also said many of the allegations had little to do with what the defendants knew when they published.
Trump said the case should go on because the Journal could not prove the note was real beyond doubt. This held even after the House committee released a copy.
The law does not work that way in a case like this. The burden sits with the plaintiff.
Trump had to show the paper knew or strongly suspected the letter was false. The court found he did not.
The dismissal has one practical effect. Murdoch will not have to sit for a deposition about the birthday book and the paper’s reporting.
The case moved to discovery, both sides could have demanded documents and testimony.
Newsroom records and reporter communications might have come into play. The early dismissals closed that door.
The case sits on top of a larger story. Jeffrey Epstein was a wealthy financier with ties to powerful people in politics, business and academia.
In 2008, he was convicted in Florida of soliciting a minor for sex. He served 13 months in jail.
In 2019, he faced federal sex-trafficking charges in New York. He was found dead in his jail cell before trial. His death was ruled a suicide.
Legal advocates say his victims may number in the hundreds.
Trump and Epstein socialized in the past. In 2025, Trump said he cut ties after Epstein “stole” female staff from the Mar-a-Lago resort.
The critics have kept asking about the nature of the friendship. The Journal story added fuel at a tense time.
The article landed while the Trump administration was under heavy pressure.
Critics said it had held back files on the Epstein case. They noted that officials had promised transparency.
It helps explain why the story drew so much attention. It also helps explain why Trump reacted so quickly. The lawsuit came within a day.
