.jpg)
Donald Trump’s legal battle against media mogul Rupert Murdoch and The Wall Street Journal isn’t just another high-profile defamation suit. With potential implications for the 2024 presidential race and renewed scrutiny of Trump’s past ties to Jeffrey Epstein, this case could prove to be far more explosive than it first appeared.
On July 19, former President Trump filed a massive $10 billion defamation lawsuit against Murdoch, Wall Street Journal reporters Khadeeja Safdar and Joseph Palazzolo, and executives at Dow Jones and News Corp., the parent companies behind the newspaper. The basis of the suit is a Journal article published a day earlier, which claimed Trump wrote a “bawdy” birthday note to Epstein in 2003 a claim Trump has adamantly denied.
What's Behind the Lawsuit?
According to the complaint, the article falsely attributed a risqué birthday letter to Trump, suggesting a friendly and personal relationship with Epstein at a time when the disgraced financier’s crimes had not yet been publicly exposed. Trump’s legal team argues that the Journal’s reporting constitutes defamation, severely damaging the former president’s reputation during a politically sensitive time.
Dow Jones responded firmly, saying, “We have full confidence in the rigor and accuracy of our reporting, and will vigorously defend against any lawsuit.” Meanwhile, Trump’s representatives and News Corp. have yet to issue detailed public responses.
What the Lawsuit Could Uncover
Legal experts suggest that the discovery process the pre-trial phase where both sides can demand evidence could open the door to broader questions about Trump’s historic relationship with Epstein.
Chris Mattei, a former federal prosecutor known for representing Sandy Hook families in their lawsuit against Alex Jones, explained that the lawsuit could unfold in several ways. Either the defense pushes for dismissal and limits discovery, or they opt for a full, reciprocal discovery process which could be riskier for Trump.
If The Wall Street Journal chooses to pursue open discovery, they could request that Trump disclose any documents, communications, or other records related to his association with Epstein, including his knowledge of Epstein’s criminal activities. This raises the possibility that the lawsuit may inadvertently highlight Trump’s past ties to the convicted sex offender, even though no criminal wrongdoing has ever been proven against the former president in this context.
What Is Actual Malice and Why It Matters
To win a defamation case as a public figure, Trump must demonstrate “actual malice” meaning the defendants either knowingly published false information or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. Media lawyer Damon Dunn noted that this is a high legal bar, especially given that the letter in question, whether genuine or not, was reportedly written long before Epstein’s criminal behavior became widely known.
Dunn also emphasized that even if the Journal’s attribution of the letter turns out to be incorrect, the key issue would be whether the paper acted with constitutional malice not merely whether the claim was wrong.
The case could mirror the 2023 dismissal of actor Justin Baldoni’s suit against The New York Times, where a similar legal standard limited the plaintiff’s ability to claim damages without clear evidence of malice.
Could the Case Backfire on Trump?
Mattei warned that the lawsuit might expose Trump to reciprocal legal risks, especially if the defense argues that understanding the nature of Trump’s relationship with Epstein is essential to evaluating the plausibility of the letter.
“If Trump’s defense is that this story is false, then the Journal can argue that exploring his history with Epstein is fair game,” Mattei said. “This could include questions about their interactions, communications, and the extent of their personal or business relationship.”
Although some legal experts see this line of questioning as speculative, the political fallout could be significant, especially with the 2024 election looming. If documents or testimony shed new light on the Trump-Epstein dynamic regardless of legal liability it may influence public opinion at a crucial time.
A History That Won’t Go Away
Trump’s connection to Epstein has long been the subject of media scrutiny. In a 2002 interview with New York Magazine, Trump called Epstein a “terrific guy” and remarked on his preference for younger women. The two were often seen together at parties and social events in the 1980s and early 2000s.
By 2019, however, Trump claimed to have had a “falling out” with Epstein over a real estate dispute in 2004 and stated he was “not a fan” of the financier. Still, Trump’s name appears in Epstein’s now-infamous “black book,” and flight logs list him as a passenger on Epstein’s private jet on multiple occasions.
Though no evidence has emerged linking Trump to Epstein’s sex crimes, these associations have continued to haunt the former president, especially as political opponents and media figures revisit the topic.
Trump’s Push for Transparency or Political Strategy?
Amid renewed calls for government transparency, Trump recently promised to release all available files related to Epstein’s criminal investigation. On July 7, the Department of Justice issued a statement indicating it would not disclose additional Epstein-related records.
In a Truth Social post on Saturday, Trump responded defiantly, asserting that he had asked the DOJ to release all relevant grand jury testimony “subject only to Court Approval.” He then criticized the media and political opponents, calling them “radical left lunatics” who will never be satisfied.
While Trump’s comments may resonate with his base, legal observers say his statements may not help him in court, especially if the lawsuit begins to unearth sensitive documents or testimonies.
What’s Next for the Lawsuit?
The procedural aspects of the case are likely to unfold slowly. If The Wall Street Journal files a motion to dismiss, as expected, the initial legal wrangling could stretch out over the next six months. Whether the case proceeds to full discovery or is settled behind closed doors remains to be seen.
But regardless of the legal outcome, the lawsuit has already achieved something politically potent: It has brought Trump’s name and his alleged Epstein ties back into the national conversation and that alone may carry consequences beyond the courtroom.
.jpg)