Federal judge dismisses Trump’s lawsuit as improperly composed, gives him deadline to amend complaint
Summary of the Ruling
A Florida federal judge, Steven Merryday, has dismissed former President Donald Trump’s $15 billion defamation lawsuit against The New York Times, four of its reporters, and Penguin Random House. The lawsuit was struck down for its 85-page length, inclusion of irrelevant content, and failure to provide a clear, concise statement of what Trump alleged was defamatory.
Judge’s Criticisms and Instructions
Judge Merryday ruled that the complaint violated Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which requires that complaints be “short and plain” in stating the claims. He chastised the filing for being more of a political document or attack platform than a legal complaint, full of praise for Trump, attacks on critics, and superfluous commentary.
He has given Trump’s legal team 28 days to submit an amended complaint, limiting it to no more than 40 pages, and urging that it be written in a “professional and dignified manner.”
Background of the Lawsuit
Trump’s lawsuit alleged that The New York Times defamed him in various articles and a book during the lead-up to the 2024 presidential election, particularly criticizing coverage that discussed his business success, his role in media, and financial history. Trump claimed the reporting misrepresented facts in order to damage his reputation.
Reactions and Implications
The Times responded to the ruling by welcoming it, saying the judge recognized that the complaint functioned more like political rhetoric than a serious legal case. Trump’s legal team indicated they plan to refile under the court’s rules. The case highlights tensions between media organizations and political figures in the U.S., especially around defamation, free press, and the proper use of courts.
