• A federal judge struck down President Trump’s $15 billion lawsuit against the New York Times, its reporters, and Penguin Random House.
• Judge Steven Merryday derided the 85-page complaint as a political document, not a legitimate legal filing.
• Trump’s legal team has 28 days to refile a streamlined version, vowing to continue holding “Fake News” accountable.

TAMPA, Fla. (TDR) — A federal judge dismissed President Donald Trump’s $15 billion lawsuit against the New York Times, four of its reporters, and publisher Penguin Random House, ruling the nearly 90-page complaint was less a legal filing than a political broadside. The decision represents a sharp rebuke of Trump’s ongoing campaign against mainstream media outlets he accuses of defamation and bias.

Judge Merryday’s Sharp Words

U.S. District Judge Steven D. Merryday, appointed by President George H.W. Bush, wrote that the complaint violated Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which requires “simple, concise, and direct” statements of claims. Instead, he said Trump’s filing was “laborious” and “enervating,” a sprawling political speech masquerading as litigation.

“A complaint is not a megaphone for public relations or a podium for a passionate oration at a political rally,” Merryday wrote, comparing the filing to London’s Hyde Park Speakers’ Corner. He further derided the document as filled with “repetitive and laudatory” statements about Trump rather than a clear articulation of legal claims.

Freedom-Loving Beachwear by Red Beach Nation - Save 10% With Code RVM10

The judge stopped short of ruling on the merits of Trump’s defamation allegations, instead giving his legal team 28 days to refile an amended complaint capped at 40 pages.

Trump’s Legal Offensive

The lawsuit, filed Monday, accused Times reporters Peter Baker, Susanne Craig, Michael Schmidt, and Russ Buettner of publishing articles “filled with repugnant distortions and fabrications” about Trump. It also targeted Penguin Random House for publishing books that Trump claims misrepresented his record.

Trump’s legal team framed the filing as part of a broader mission to “hold the Fake News accountable.” A spokesperson said the former president “will continue to pursue this powerhouse lawsuit in accordance with the judge’s direction on logistics.”

The suit relied heavily on Times reporting from Trump’s first term and the 2024 campaign, revisiting coverage that the White House previously blasted as unfair. Among the few references to his second term were articles about the administration’s claims that Barack Obama officials constructed a false narrative around Russian interference in the 2016 election.

The Times Responds

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE THE DUPREE REPORT

The Times, which has often been the target of Trump’s ire, welcomed the judge’s decision. “We recognize the complaint was a political document rather than a serious legal filing,” a spokesperson said. Executive editor Joe Kahn went further, pledging that the paper will “fight it and we will win.”

Earlier this week, the Times characterized the lawsuit as an effort to intimidate and discourage investigative reporting. The organization said Trump’s claims “lack any legitimate legal basis” and represent a direct attempt to silence journalists.

Legal and Political Fallout

Judge Merryday’s ruling highlights the limits of courtroom battles as vehicles for political messaging. By focusing on the structure of the complaint rather than its underlying claims, he underscored the judiciary’s insistence on procedural clarity even when the litigant is the sitting president.

Merryday is no stranger to high-profile rulings. During the Biden administration, he issued several opinions against the CDC’s pandemic restrictions, siding with Florida in its fight to keep cruise ships operating. His rebuke of Trump’s legal team carries weight given his reputation as a conservative-leaning jurist.

Legal analysts note that while Trump can refile, narrowing the complaint to 40 pages will force his attorneys to focus on specific factual allegations rather than sweeping political arguments. That could limit the scope of his claims but also sharpen their legal viability.

Broader Context

The case reflects Trump’s continued reliance on litigation as a political tool. Over the years, he has used lawsuits to battle journalists, publishers, and even social media companies. While many have been dismissed, they serve his broader narrative that media institutions are aligned against him.

At the same time, the Times ruling could embolden news organizations that have grown accustomed to Trump’s threats. By labeling the complaint a “political document,” the judge effectively validated the argument that the lawsuit was more about messaging than law.

If lawsuits become mere extensions of political campaigns, can the courts remain a neutral forum for justice — or will they become another stage for partisan combat?

Follow The Wayne Dupree Show on YouTube

Freedom-Loving Beachwear by Red Beach Nation - Save 10% With Code RVM10