President Donald Trump speaks with reporters before departing on Marine One from the South Lawn of the White House, Thursday, April 16, 2026, in Washington (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta).
In July 2025, as the Trump administration grappled with a crisis over its management of the Jeffrey Epstein files, the Wall Street Journal was gearing up to release a significant exposé. Before the piece was published, President Donald Trump threatened legal action against the Journal, accusing it of defamation, and later followed through on his threat. Trump has consistently claimed that a “Birthday Book” letter from 2003, which celebrated his former friend’s 50th birthday, is fabricated.
Trump’s legal challenge faced a serious setback mere months after it was filed, as the estate of the deceased sexual offender provided Congress with a letter identical to the one reported by the Journal. In response, the defendants have not only moved to dismiss the case but have also requested U.S. District Judge Darrin P. Gayles, appointed by Barack Obama, to compel Trump to cover the costs incurred from what they argue is a “baseless” lawsuit.
“This lawsuit lacks merit according to Florida’s anti-SLAPP legislation,” stated the motion to dismiss due to a failure to present a viable claim.
The filing emphasized that Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation, like Trump’s, should result in a “necessary” and “obligatory compensation of attorneys’ fees and expenses,” given that the Journal was unjustly compelled to defend itself against “groundless litigation.”
Importantly, the Journal argued that the documentation released by the House Oversight Committee proved that Trump would “never” be able to establish that the article was “materially false” or published with actual malice.
The Jeffrey Epstein birthday book letter, signed by ‘Donald’ (House Oversight Committee via Epstein’s estate)
A WSJ article from September on the estate materials was bylined by Khadeeja Safdar and Joe Palazzolo, the same reporters Trump sued. The opening line of the story declared that Congress had “a letter with President Trump’s signature” on it “that he has said doesn’t exist.”
On Wednesday, the defendants said the development should put an end to the case because it “negates—rather than supports—an actual malice finding.”
“[T]he Sept. 8 Article compares the signature in the Birthday Book (which only includes Plaintiff’s first name) with Plaintiff’s signature in other letters (which likewise only include his first name): Plaintiff tellingly does not dispute that resemblance (because he cannot),” the filing says.
If Trump is ultimately forced to pay his opponent’s legal bills for bringing a “meritless” federal case in Florida, it wouldn’t be the first time.
Just one month ago, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declined to disturb the $1 million in sanctions Trump and his lawyers face for filing a “frivolous” RICO lawsuit “without any merit” against Hillary Clinton and a collection of Democrats and entities the president blamed for conspiring to bankroll “an unthinkable plot” to tar the 2016 Trump campaign, cloud his first term through “a sinister link” to Russia, and harm his business interests.
The district judge who tossed the case called Trump “a prolific and sophisticated litigant who is repeatedly using the courts to seek revenge on political adversaries” and “the mastermind of strategic abuse of the judicial process,” who “knew full well the impact of his actions.”