President Donald Trump is fighting another battle against the media in his $15 billion defamation lawsuit against the New York Times, which experts call an example of the president using the legal process to target the First Amendment freedom of the press.
The lawsuit named four reporters for the New York Times along with publisher Penguin Random House. It took issue with three articles written by the outlet and a book written by two of its journalists, published two months before the 2024 presidential elections, which discussed Trump’s inherited wealth and his financial difficulties with his businesses.
On Sept. 15, the president’s Miami-based attorney filed the federal lawsuit in the Middle District of Florida, alleging “malicious defamation” from the media outlet that the lawsuit said was a “full-throated mouthpiece of the Democrat Party.”
On Truth Social, Trump called the New York Times a “degenerate” newspaper and brought up that he’s been successful in other lawsuits against the media, including a settlement with ABC News and CBS News’ “60 Minutes.” “The New York Times has been allowed to freely lie, smear, and defame me for far too long, and that stops, NOW!” Trump wrote on Sept. 15
The filing comes two months after Trump filed a lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal, related to a story about a leather-bound birthday book given to the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein with letters from family, friends and even Trump. Some of the entries in this book, including from Trump, were released by the House Oversight Committee Sept. 8.
WSJ lawsuit: What to know about First Amendment issues in Trump’s lawsuit against Wall Street Journal
A spokesperson for the New York Times said in a statement the lawsuit has no merit and lacked “legitimate legal claims.” The statement said it was an attempt to “stifle and discourage independent reporting.”
“The New York Times will not be deterred by intimidation tactics,” the spokesperson said. “We will continue to pursue the facts without fear or favor and stand up for journalists’ First Amendment right to ask questions on behalf of the American people.”
Here’s what to know about the 85-page lawsuit, and what First Amendment experts say is another move from the Trump administration to attack media outlets:
This lawsuit may get SLAPP’ed out of court
Most states, including Florida, have anti-SLAPP laws, which stands for Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation. These laws are meant to protect free speech from lawsuits intended to intimidate, silence or punish critics with burdensome legal costs.
SLAPP lawsuits often are used to silence or punish individuals or organizations, like journalists or whistleblowers, who speak out on matters of public interest.
More: Florida free speech law could aid Wall Street Journal in Trump defamation suit
Normally, anti-SLAPP laws prevent frivolous lawsuits. Perhaps the most noticeable sign of a SLAPP suit is incredibly high damages — in this case, $15 billion.
Other signs include a failure to identify specific factual statements to litigate and loose rhetoric throughout the complaint, said Bob Corn-Revere, chief counsel for the Foundation of Individual Rights and Expression, a national First Amendment watchdog.
Although anti-SLAPP laws more often apply in only state courts, Florida’s law uniquely applies also in its federal courts. In the New York Times’ case, its attorneys could argue for Trump to pay attorneys’ fees under the law’s provisions.
Corn-Revere said the idea for these laws is to prevent the courts of being used as a means of punishing people for speaking out. “Even if the case is meritless, you don’t want the case to be used as a way to punish people or harass people by using the legal process to impose burdens on them,” he said.
What’s in the 85-page filing?
The case was filed in a Central Florida federal court by Trump’s Miami attorney, Alejandro Brito. Last month, Brito also filed the lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal in federal court in South Florida.
Judge Steven Merryday, who was appointed by former President George H.W. Bush, will preside over the case against the New York Times. Merryday became a senior judge on Aug. 31, a status granted to judges who are at least 65 years old and have served on the bench for at least 15 years.
Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond who focuses on judicial selection, said he found it interesting that the case was filed in Central Florida versus South Florida, since Trump’s residence and attorney is in South Florida.
Tobias said he believed Trump sought to get his case assigned to a judge he appointed, since in South Florida the only judge that has given him grace has been Aileen Cannon, who threw out Trump’s classified documents case.
But based on the complaint, Tobias said he didn’t believe this lawsuit was going to go anywhere: “It seems more like a press release or publicity stunt than a serious challenge to the New York Times,” he said.
The lawsuit includes multiple pages lauding Trump’s business ventures and other lawsuits he’s had with media outlets. It named The New York Times Company and four reporters: Susanne Craig, Russ Buettner, Peter Baker and Michael S. Schmidt.
The complaint cited three stories all published shortly before the 2024 presidential elections. The first story includes some information that is in a book by Buettner and Craig, “Lucky Loser: How Donald Trump Squandered His Father’s Fortune and Created the Illusion of Success.”
The second story the lawsuit took issue with published weeks before the election, “For Trump, a Lifetime of Scandals Heads Toward a Moment of Judgment.” It evaluated how Trump thrived in his campaign despite his indictments and legal troubles.
The third story was an interview with retired U.S. Marine Corps general and Trump chief of staff John Kelly, who said Trump would govern like a dictator.
Trump’s record of suing the media
Trump has touted his settlement with ABC News for $15 million that’s going toward his presidential library and with CBS News parent company Paramount for $16 million.
It’s not unusual for journalists and media outlets to be accused of defamation, but there is a high standard in courts for a public official to claim libel and defamation.
In the U.S., a public official claiming libel must prove “actual malice,” meaning the statement was made knowing it was false or with reckless disregard for the truth. This higher standard, set by the Supreme Court case of New York Times v. Sullivan (1964), protects robust debate on public issues.
Brito, however, created a novel interpretation of the standard: “Each (defendant) feels actual malice towards President Trump in the colloquial sense: that is, each – Craig, Buettner, Baker, and Schmidt, as individuals, and the Times and Penguin’s relevant executives as corporations – subjectively wishes to harm President Trump, and each wish to manipulate public opinion to President Trump’s disadvantage to worsen his current and future political and economic prospects,” the complaint says.
“Put bluntly, Defendants baselessly hate President Trump in a deranged way.”
More: Trump is suing the New York Times. What other media outlets has he sued?
Trump also has sued outlets like CNN and the Washington Post over the past five years. Seth Stern, the director of advocacy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation, said he believed this type of lawsuit was meant to delegitimatize news outlets who “expose him” and use defamation law to censor a critic.
“Donald Trump knows full well that the suit lacks merit,” Stern said. “The goal is to intimidate the media to potentially extract a settlement.”
This reporting content is supported by a partnership with Freedom Forum and Journalism Funding Partners. USA Today Network-Florida First Amendment reporter Stephany Matat is based in Tallahassee, Fla. She can be reached at SMatat@gannett.com. On X: @stephanymatat.
This article originally appeared on Tallahassee Democrat: First Amendment issues in Trump’s lawsuit against the New York Times
