On a headline-grabbing Friday, September 19, 2025, a Florida federal judge delivered a sweeping rebuke to President Donald Trump, tossing out his $15 billion defamation lawsuit against The New York Times and several of its journalists. The ruling, issued by U.S. District Judge Steven Merryday, was as much a critique of legal decorum as it was a procedural decision, putting the brakes on what the court called an overly long and rhetorically charged complaint.
Trump’s lawsuit, sprawling across 85 pages, targeted four Times journalists and the publisher Penguin Random House. It stemmed from a book and three articles published in the critical months leading up to the 2024 presidential election. The president’s legal team claimed the reporting painted a "fact-free narrative" about his finances, his tenure on "The Apprentice," and even his early business dealings, including relationships with his father, Fred Trump. Trump’s complaint also took issue with articles published in October 2024, including Peter Baker’s "For Trump, a Lifetime of Scandals Heads Toward a Moment of Judgment" and Michael S. Schmidt’s interview with John Kelly, headlined "As Election Nears, Kelly Warns Trump Would Rule Like a Dictator."
But, as reported by Reuters, Judge Merryday was unmoved by the volume or tone of Trump’s claims. In a blunt four-page order, the judge wrote, "A complaint is not a megaphone for public relations or a podium for a passionate oration at a political rally." He added, "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." Merryday, an appointee of former President George H.W. Bush, emphasized that the legal process requires professionalism and restraint: "This action will begin, will continue, and will end in accord with the rules of procedure and in a professional and dignified manner."
The judge’s order was not merely a procedural setback but a pointed critique of the complaint’s style and substance. Merryday found Trump’s filing "tedious and burdensome," noting that it failed to comply with federal rules requiring a "short and plain statement" of the claim. He criticized the document for being "repetitive" and "superfluous," packed with unnecessary attacks against critics and lavish praise for Trump’s own "business genius, creativity, perseverance, talent, authenticity, and other unique traits." The complaint, Merryday observed, did not reach its first defamation count until page 80, and included digressions such as a defense of Fred Trump and a claim that "‘The Apprentice’ represented the cultural magnitude of President Trump’s singular brilliance, which captured the [Z]eitgeist of our time."
According to Variety, the judge ordered Trump to file a new complaint within 28 days, limiting it to no more than 40 pages and instructing that it "accord with the rules of procedure." The ruling was met with swift reactions from both sides. A spokesperson for The New York Times said, "We welcome the judge’s quick ruling, which recognized that the complaint was a political document rather than a serious legal filing." Penguin Random House, also named in the suit, applauded the decision, echoing the judge's language and calling the complaint "improper and impermissible."
Trump’s legal team, undeterred, signaled their intent to refile. "President Trump will continue to hold the Fake News accountable through this powerhouse lawsuit against the New York Times, its reporters, and Penguin Random House, in accordance with the judge’s direction on logistics," a spokesperson said, as reported by Reuters. The president’s team maintained that the lawsuit was a necessary response to what they described as a campaign of defamation meant to sabotage Trump’s 2024 presidential bid and tarnish his reputation as a successful businessman.
The legal saga is not Trump’s first foray into the courtroom against media outlets. He has previously sued ABC News, CBS News’ "60 Minutes," The Wall Street Journal, and media mogul Rupert Murdoch. Some of these cases have ended in settlements, such as the $16 million agreement with CBS News’ parent Paramount Global over an interview with Vice President Kamala Harris. Trump’s $10 billion lawsuit against Murdoch and the Journal over reporting about his connections to the late financier Jeffrey Epstein is still ongoing, and he has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing or close association with Epstein, as noted by Business Standard and other outlets.
The judge’s order stands out not only for its legal implications but also for its tone—a rare and public admonition of a sitting president’s conduct in court filings. Merryday’s language was clear: "Plaintiffs like Trump are supposed to ‘fairly, precisely, directly, soberly, and economically’ tell defendants in complaints why they are being sued." The judge found the president’s complaint lacking on all these counts, instead accusing it of being "decidedly improper and impermissible."
Trump’s relationship with the press has long been adversarial, and this lawsuit is part of a broader strategy to push back against coverage he deems unfair. In a Truth Social post earlier in the week, Trump accused The New York Times of a "decades-long method of lying about your favourite President, my family, business, MAGA and our nation." He wrote, "I am proud to hold this once respected ‘rag’ responsible, as we are doing with the fake news networks such as our successful litigation against George Slopadopoulos/ABC/Disney, and 60 Minutes/CBS/Paramount."
Yet, the judge’s ruling draws a clear line between political theater and the legal process. "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 sentiment was echoed by legal observers, who noted that while political figures often use litigation as a public relations tool, the courts demand a different standard—one of clarity, brevity, and relevance.
The case also highlights the tension between public figures and the press, particularly in an era where accusations of "fake news" and media bias are part of the daily political discourse. While Trump’s supporters see these lawsuits as a necessary defense against what they perceive as coordinated media attacks, critics argue that such legal actions are attempts to chill independent journalism and stifle dissent. The New York Times and its allies have consistently maintained that robust reporting—even when critical of those in power—is essential to democracy, and that attempts to silence the press through litigation threaten that foundation.
For now, the ball is back in Trump’s court—literally. He has 28 days to rework his complaint, trimming its rhetorical flourishes and focusing on the core legal claims. Whether the amended filing will fare any better remains to be seen, but Judge Merryday’s message is clear: in the courtroom, substance must trump spectacle.
