President Donald Trump’s massive $15 billion defamation lawsuit against the New York Times just got slapped down by a Florida federal judge for being more of a novel than a legal filing.
According to the New York Post, in a ruling on Friday, Tampa U.S. District Judge Steven D. Merryday tossed the case, criticizing its sprawling 85-page complaint for two simple defamation claims, while giving Trump 28 days to refile a tighter version capped at 40 pages.
This legal drama kicked off on Monday when Trump filed the hefty suit against the New York Times, reporters Peter Baker, Russ Buettner, Susanne Craig, and Michael S. Schmidt, as well as Penguin Random House. The complaint targets three articles and a book, “Lucky Loser: How Donald Trump Squandered His Father’s Fortune and Created The Illusion of Success,” co-authored by Buettner and Craig, published in September 2024. Trump claims these works were crafted to undermine his political ambitions and bias legal proceedings against him.
Before filing, Trump had already threatened to sue the New York Times over coverage of his alleged connections to the late Jeffrey Epstein. Last week, the newspaper reported on a suggestive note and drawing Epstein gave to Trump, which fueled the former president’s ire. It’s no surprise that Trump sees this as part of a broader media campaign to tarnish his image.
In announcing the lawsuit on Monday, Trump pointed fingers at the New York Times for what he calls persistent interference by legacy media. He argues that these outlets have worked overtime to sabotage his standing, a claim that resonates with many who feel the press often plays politics instead of reporting facts.
Judge Merryday, appointed by former President George H.W. Bush, didn’t mince words in his dismissal, calling out the complaint for its improper use as a soapbox. “A civil complaint shouldn’t be ‘a megaphone for public relations,’” he declared. With all due respect to passionate advocacy, the courtroom isn’t the place for a press conference, and Merryday’s jab hits the mark for those tired of legal overreach.
The judge’s order to cap the revised complaint at 40 pages is a clear signal: get to the point. Many conservatives might see this as a fair shake—Trump gets another shot to make his case without the fluff. But will a shorter filing pack the same punch against a media giant?
Trump’s team isn’t backing down, with a spokesman asserting, “President Trump will continue to hold the Fake News accountable through this powerhouse lawsuit.” That’s the kind of grit supporters admire, though skeptics might wonder if this is more about optics than outcomes in a system often stacked against outsiders.
On the other side, a New York Times spokesperson couldn’t resist a victory lap, stating, “We welcome the judge’s quick ruling, which recognized that the complaint was a political document rather than a serious legal filing.” Nice try, but let’s not pretend the Times is an innocent bystander in the culture war—it’s been swinging editorial haymakers for years.
The core of Trump’s grievance lies in the content of the articles and the book, which he alleges were timed and worded to prejudice judges and juries in ongoing cases against him. For many on the right, this reeks of the progressive agenda weaponizing journalism to influence outcomes, a tactic that’s become all too familiar.
Yet, Judge Merryday’s critique wasn’t about the merits of Trump’s claims but the way they were presented. An 85-page diatribe for two defamation counts does seem excessive, and even supporters might admit that brevity could sharpen the argument against media overreach. Still, the underlying issue remains—can a public figure like Trump ever get a fair shake when legacy outlets seem to have an axe to grind? The New York Times has long been viewed by conservatives as less a newspaper and more a mouthpiece for elitist narratives, a perception this lawsuit aims to challenge.
With 28 days to refile, Trump’s legal team has a tight window to streamline their case while keeping the heat on the defendants. Supporters will be watching closely to see if this revised complaint can cut through the noise and focus on actionable defamation claims.
For now, the dismissal is a setback, but not a knockout blow, in Trump’s ongoing war with what many on the right see as a biased press. The question is whether this lawsuit, even trimmed down, can shift the narrative or if it’s just another skirmish in a much larger cultural battle.
Whatever the outcome, this case underscores a deeper divide between conservative voices and a media establishment often accused of playing favorites. Judge Merryday’s ruling might be a procedural slap on the wrist, but for Trump’s base, it’s yet another reminder of the uphill fight against entrenched power. Let’s see if the next 40 pages can turn the tide.
