A federal judge in Florida just tossed out President Donald Trump’s whopping $15 billion lawsuit against The New York Times with the kind of decisiveness that could make even the toughest conservative cheer.
As reported by USA Today, U.S. District Judge Steven Merryday dismissed Trump’s libel and defamation claims, citing a lack of clear and concise arguments in the hefty 85-page complaint.
Filed on September 15, this legal battle targeted not just The New York Times but also Penguin Books and several reporters, including Susanne Craig, Ross Buettner, Peter Baker, and Michael Schmidt.
Trump’s lawsuit accused the newspaper of maliciously defaming him through a series of articles and a 2024 book by Craig and Buettner titled “Lucky Loser,” which paints a critical picture of his financial legacy.
Judge Merryday, appointed by former President George H.W. Bush, didn’t mince words, stating, “A complaint is not a megaphone for public relations.” Well, there’s a polite jab if I’ve ever heard one—turns out the courtroom isn’t a soapbox for political theater.
The judge’s ruling pointed out that the complaint lacked a succinct basis for the court to even consider, suggesting Trump’s team tried to turn a legal filing into a public rant.
But it’s not game over yet—Merryday has given Trump 28 days to refile a revised lawsuit, though he’s capped it at a leaner 40 pages.
That’s a steep cut from the original 85 pages, and one has to wonder if Trump’s legal team can trim the fat without losing their core argument. It’s a challenge, but conservatives know a thing or two about streamlining when the stakes are high.
Trump’s filing didn’t hold back, claiming the defendants “maliciously published” content filled with distortions. That’s a heavy accusation, but without a tighter case, it’s just words on a page.
The New York Times, unsurprisingly, welcomed the dismissal with open arms, stating, “We welcome the judge’s quick ruling.” They’re not wrong to gloat a little—after all, a swift smackdown of a $15 billion claim is no small victory for the press.
They doubled down, asserting the lawsuit “lacks any legitimate legal claims” and is merely an attempt to stifle independent reporting. While I’m no fan of the progressive media machine, I’ll concede they’ve got a point about protecting journalistic freedom—though one wonders if their reporting is as “independent” as they claim.
The Times also vowed not to be deterred by what they call “intimidation tactics,” promising to keep pursuing facts without fear. Admirable in theory, but let’s see if their idea of “facts” aligns with the average American’s reality.
For many conservatives, this case highlights a deeper issue: the unchecked power of mainstream media to shape narratives with little accountability.
When outlets like The New York Times can publish scathing critiques and books like “Lucky Loser,” it’s no wonder folks on the right feel targeted by a progressive agenda.
Yet, the legal system demands precision, not passion, and Judge Merryday’s ruling reminds us that even a figure as polarizing as Trump must play by those rules. It’s a bitter pill, but fairness in the courts is something we conservatives champion, even when it stings.
