A federal judge on Friday threw out President Trump’s $15 billion defamation suit against the New York Times, calling it “tedious and burdensome” and saying that a complaint is not “a protected platform to rage against an adversary.”
Trump sued the newspaper, several of its reporters, and the publisher of the book “Lucky Loser” over reporting about the president’s finances and business career.
In a ruling on Friday, Judge Steven D. Merryday struck the complaint and gave Trump’s lawyers 28 days to refile. The judge ordered that the amended complaint be no more than 40 pages long and that it “accord with the rules of procedure.”
“As every lawyer knows (or is presumed to know), a complaint is not a public forum for vituperation and invective — not a protected platform to rage against an adversary,” the judge wrote. “A complaint is not a megaphone for public relations or a podium for a passionate oration at a political rally or the functional equivalent of the Hyde Park Speakers’ Corner.”
Trump filed an 85-page complaint on Tuesday in federal court in Tampa, Fla., alleging two counts of defamation. The complaint quoted extensively from the reporting, which it alleged contained numerous falsehoods, and accused the reporters of failing to acknowledge Trump’s “business genius, creativity,
perseverance, talent, authenticity, and other unique traits.”
Much of the complaint is given over to a laudatory account of Trump’s business and political career, claiming for instance that Trump’s 2024 victory was “the greatest personal and political achievement in American history.”
In his ruling, Merryday found that many of the allegations were “repetitive ” and “superfluous,” and that it states its allegations “in abundant, florid, and enervating detail.”
The judge called out several statements as being unnecessary to make the president’s case, including a claim that “‘The Apprentice’ represented the cultural magnitude of President Trump’s singular brilliance, which captured the [Z]eitgeist of our time.”
“Although lawyers receive a modicum of expressive latitude in pleading the claim of a client, the complaint in this action extends far beyond the outer bound of that latitude,” Merryday wrote. “This complaint stands unmistakably and inexcusably athwart the requirements of Rule 8. This action will begin, will continue, and will end in accord with the rules of procedure and in a professional and dignified manner.”
