Former U.S. President Donald J. Trump has filed a $10 billion defamation lawsuit against media mogul Rupert Murdoch, The Wall Street Journal, its parent company News Corp, Dow Jones, and two WSJ reporters, over a controversial article that linked him to a lewd birthday card allegedly sent to Jeffrey Epstein in 2003. The lawsuit, filed on July 18, 2025, in the Southern District of Florida in Miami, claims the WSJ falsely reported that Trump had sent Epstein a sexually suggestive birthday greeting containing a drawing of a naked woman and text wishing Epstein a life filled with “wonderful secrets,” with Trump’s name allegedly on it.
Trump has forcefully denied the allegations, calling the story fabricated, malicious, and defamatory. According to his legal team, the letter referenced in the Journal’s July 17 article does not exist, and no evidence proves that Trump ever authored or sent such a card. The former president argues that the story was published with “actual malice,” meaning the reporters and editors either knew the claim was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. He claims the article inflicted massive reputational and financial harm, not only damaging his public image but also interfering with his ongoing political and business activities.
In the lawsuit, Trump names several high-profile defendants: Rupert Murdoch, the 94-year-old owner of News Corp; Robert Thomson, CEO of News Corp; and WSJ reporters Joseph Palazzolo and Khadeeja Safdar, who co-authored the piece. The article in question relied on unnamed sources and claimed that the card had been shown to the reporters as part of the investigation into Epstein’s inner circle. Dow Jones, the publisher of the Wall Street Journal, has responded by defending its reporting, stating that it stands by the accuracy and newsworthiness of the article and intends to contest the lawsuit vigorously in court.
Trump’s legal team is seeking $10 billion in damages and has filed an urgent motion to depose Rupert Murdoch within 15 days, citing his age and claimed personal involvement in the matter. According to the court filing, Trump allegedly reached out to Murdoch before the story’s publication, and Murdoch reportedly assured him that he would “take care of it.” Trump’s lawyers argue this interaction is further proof that the publication knowingly allowed a false story to run, fueling their claim of actual malice. A federal judge has ordered Murdoch to respond to the motion by August 4, 2025.
This lawsuit comes at a time when Trump is attempting to rebuild his public image and prepare for the 2026 election cycle. The Epstein connection, long a source of controversy, continues to haunt several public figures. Trump, who had known Epstein socially in the 1990s and early 2000s, has repeatedly denied any criminal association with him and claims to have severed ties well before Epstein’s 2008 conviction for sex crimes. Epstein died by suicide in jail in 2019 while awaiting federal trial for sex trafficking of minors, and his associate Ghislaine Maxwell was later convicted on similar charges.
The implications of the lawsuit go far beyond Trump’s personal reputation. Legal experts suggest that the case could test the limits of defamation law in the U.S., particularly the legal standard of “actual malice” applied to public figures. Trump’s legal team is aiming high with a $10 billion demand far surpassing even the $787 million settlement between Fox News and Dominion Voting Systems, and the $1.5 billion judgment against conspiracy theorist Alex Jones. If the case proceeds to trial, it could also bring attention to media practices, sourcing standards, and the line between public interest and reputational harm.
Judge Darrin P. Gayles, who has been randomly assigned to the case, will oversee initial proceedings. He is the first openly gay Black man to serve as a federal judge in Florida and is known for his extensive legal experience as a former prosecutor. His decisions in the early stages of the lawsuit especially concerning depositions and admissibility of evidence may prove pivotal.
As the case develops, media circles, political observers, and legal analysts alike are closely watching what could become one of the most consequential media defamation cases in recent history. Whether the lawsuit results in a massive financial award, a quiet settlement, or a courtroom showdown, it will undoubtedly shape the conversation around Trump, media responsibility, and the lasting legacy of the Epstein scandal.
