File photo

 

In a decisive move, a federal judge has thrown out Donald Trump's defamation lawsuit against The New York Times. Judge Steven D. Merryday dismissed the suit, criticising the 85-page complaint as "decidedly improper and impermissible" and not adhering to federal rules for filing civil cases. Trump's team now has 30 days to refile the lawsuit.

 

The lawsuit, initially seeking $15 billion in damages, accused the Times of being a "virtual mouthpiece" for the Democrats, also naming Penguin Random House and four of the newspaper’s reporters as defendants. Judge Merryday highlighted that the complaint, which he deemed overly lengthy and full of invective, must be resubmitted with no more than 40 pages. Trump's team has announced their intention to revise and refile their suit.

 

Legal experts widely criticised the original filing as baseless and likened it to a public relations tactic rather than a legitimate legal pursuit. The New York Times responded positively to the judge's prompt dismissal, calling the complaint more of a political document than a serious legal claim. Executive editor Joe Kahn reiterated their stance, maintaining Trump was "wrong on the facts" and "wrong on the law."

 

Looking forward, Trump's legal team is expected to submit a more concise version of the complaint, as mandated by Judge Merryday. Meanwhile, the New York Times and other defendants remain steadfast, prepared to defend the lawsuit if and when it is refiled. The case continues to be a focal point in the ongoing tension between Trump and major media houses.

 

 

 

Key Takeaways

 

• Judge dismissed Trump's lawsuit due to improper filing for civil cases.
• Trump’s team plans to refile, adhering to the court’s instructions.
• The New York Times views the action as a political move rather than legitimate litigation.

Related Stories:

 

Read more World News Stories here

 

 

 

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from CNN 2025-09-20

 

 

Hey are his patsy’s paying for this nonsense or is it another grift on us taxpayers?(notice I didn’t ask if he was paying for it)

"A complaint is not a public forum for vituperation and invective – not a protected platform to rage against an adversary,”

 

AFAIK throwing the toys out of the pram is not in the US legal code.

BTW Trump v. WSJ et al Defendants have to file a response to the Complaint on or before September 22, 2025, which will likely include a motion to dismiss.

 

If the case goes forward, then team Trump will seek a deposition from Rupert Murdoch.

 

And defense will likely seek a deposition from the plaintiff u-know-who.

Hopefully they go after him for expenses, just to twist the knife a little.

1 hour ago, jerrymahoney said:

BTW Trump v. WSJ et al Defendants have to file a response to the Complaint on or before September 22, 2025, which will likely include a motion to dismiss.

 

If the case goes forward, then team Trump will seek a deposition from Rupert Murdoch.

 

And defense will likely seek a deposition from the plaintiff u-know-who.

Followed by a big taco most likely once the felon knows he will have to disclose under oath.

6 hours ago, Tug said:

Hey are his patsy’s paying for this nonsense or is it another grift on us taxpayers?(notice I didn’t ask if he was paying for it)

The only nonsense is the BS he has had to put up with the Marxist Left with support with people like you.  The uneducated useful idiots.  Stalin used this term.

6 hours ago, shdmn said:

Hopefully they go after him for expenses, just to twist the knife a little.

I hope that his legal team has already been paid upfront, from Trump's own personal money, and not from government funds.

Good.

Best news of today. A clown can't become King.

38 minutes ago, billd766 said:

I hope that his legal team has already been paid upfront, from Trump's own personal money, and not from government funds.

When I see a pig flying by my window, I'll let you know.

8 hours ago, Tug said:

I didn’t ask if he was paying for it

Well Trump now has pro bono legal support from several law firms he sued that immediately capitulated in the form of free pro bono support in the millions of dollars.

He also has his DOJ financed by taxpayer funds to prosecute.

Looking forward to doing the Happy Dance when that IDIOT is out of our hair.  

8 hours ago, thaipo7 said:

The only nonsense is the BS he has had to put up with the Marxist Left with support with people like you.  The uneducated useful idiots.  Stalin used this term.

You are a rube and a mark wake up.

Judge Merryday is clearly another leftist 

 

Next...

9 hours ago, billd766 said:

I hope that his legal team has already been paid upfront

Why?   Does it affect you in some way?

6 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Judge Merrygay is clearly another leftist soi boy.

President George H. W. Bush nominated Judge Merryday to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida on September 23, 1991

 

 Merryday gave Trump 28 days to file an amended complaint of less than 40 pages.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Douglas_Merryday

More grandstanding by Trump, get some headlines, but no intention of taking this to level of actual case.  Judge "....criticising the 85-page complaint as "decidedly improper and impermissible" and not adhering to federal rules for filing civil cases." 

No way in heck Trump would want NYT lawyers to depose him under oath, so had his hack lawyers ensure the case would be thrown out. This felon and adjudicated sex offender forced to tell the truth? That is an area Trump has no experience with. 

No doubt the most litigious man in history will re-file. It is always wonderful when the courts tell him what a ridiculous idiot he is. Such a fool. Such a weak, feeble, thin skinned creep. 

 

 

41 minutes ago, Emdog said:

No way in heck Trump would want NYT lawyers to depose him under oath, so had his hack lawyers ensure the case would be thrown out. This felon and adjudicated sex offender forced to tell the truth? That is an area Trump has no experience with

AI quickie:

 

Adverse Inference: In a civil case, unlike a criminal one, a court can allow the jury to draw an adverse inference from a party's refusal to testify. 

 

Dismissal of Lawsuit: If a plaintiff invokes their Fifth Amendment right to refuse to answer questions central to their case, a court may dismiss the lawsuit because the plaintiff cannot use the Fifth Amendment to avoid providing essential information for their own claims. 

Trump refiles $15B defamation lawsuit against The New York Times
A judge tossed the president's initial lawsuit against the newspaper last month, calling it "improper" and "invective."

 

Oct. 18, 2025, 12:18 AM GMT+7

President Donald Trump refiled a $15 billion lawsuit against The New York Times and three of its reporters on Thursday, accusing them of publishing defamatory comments while covering his 2024 campaign.

 

Last month, a federal judge struck down Trump's original lawsuit against the Times, which alleged that the newspaper and four of its reporters tried to ruin his reputation as a businessman, sink his campaign, and prejudice judges and juries against him.

 

In the complaint, which was also filed in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Trump accused reporters Susanne Craig, Russ Buettner and Peter Baker of making "false, malicious, and defamatory statements" against him in two articles and one book. The book, entitled “Lucky Loser: How Donald Trump Squandered His Father’s Fortune and Created the Illusion of Success," was written by Craig and Buettner and published by Penguin Random House.

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-refiles-15b-defamation-lawsuit-new-york-rcna238170

 

NB the refiled 40-page complaint contains 14 instances of the word 'malice'.

_________________________________

AI quickie (Gemini):

Yes, generally, a plaintiff (President Trump) must sit for a deposition in a federal civil suit if properly noticed by the opposing party.

 

Consequences for Failure to Appear: If a plaintiff fails to appear for their properly noticed deposition, the court can impose sanctions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(d). These sanctions can be severe and may include:

 

Treating certain facts as established.

Prohibiting the plaintiff from introducing certain evidence.

Striking pleadings (which could lead to dismissal of the case).

Ordering the plaintiff to pay the other party's expenses, including attorney's fees, caused by the failure to appear.

Too bad the judge could not throw out Trump also.

4 hours ago, JimHuaHin said:

Too bad the judge could not throw out Trump also.

Totally. His ending wars around the world is disgusting. Unbearable in fact. And he has bone spurs. Bone spurs!!! I am physically shaking with hatred for his ending wars boohoo

 

And bringing back those hostages that our team could not do? Awful. He should have left them to rot instead of making us look pathetic. I AM SO ANGRY WITH TRUMP wah wah wah