$10 Billion Lawsuit Filed After Journal Publishes Alleged Lewd Note to Epstein
Donald Trump, in a dramatic escalation of his war against the media, has filed a $10 billion lawsuit against Rupert Murdoch, the Wall Street Journal, and two of its reporters over what he calls a “false and malicious” story linking him to a lewd birthday greeting sent to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
Filed in federal court in Miami on Friday, the lawsuit also targets News Corp and Dow Jones, accusing them of libel and slander. The case follows the Journal’s explosive report alleging that Trump sent Epstein a crude sketch and a suggestive birthday message in 2003 — an accusation the president vehemently denies.
This marks Trump’s first media lawsuit since retaking office in January 2025, raising serious questions about the future of press freedom under his administration.
The Report: Trump’s Alleged ‘Bawdy’ Birthday Message
The Sketch, the Signature, and the Secrets
According to the Wall Street Journal, the birthday note was part of an album compiled by Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s long-time associate, who is currently serving a 20-year sentence for sex trafficking.
The Journal described the contents of the note in graphic terms:
“A pair of small arcs denotes the woman’s breasts, and the future president’s signature is a squiggly ‘Donald’ below her waist, mimicking pubic hair… The letter concluded: ‘Happy Birthday – and may every day be another wonderful secret.’”
Trump denounced the report as fabricated, stating there is no such letter and claiming the publication acted with “actual malice.”
On Truth Social, Trump declared:
“President Trump will be suing the Wall Street Journal, News Corp, and Mr. Murdoch shortly.”
The Lawsuit: A $10 Billion Showdown
Legal Assault on Legacy Media
The $10 billion lawsuit, filed just 24 hours after the Journal’s story broke, is unprecedented in scope. Trump accuses the Murdoch-owned outlet of intentional defamation, arguing that the story was meant to damage his character, presidency, and influence in an election year.
The lawsuit claims:
-
The story was published without evidence (the note has not been publicly released).
-
Murdoch allegedly promised Trump it would be handled before publication.
-
The outlet acted with reckless disregard for the truth.
The suit is part of a broader Trump campaign to intimidate and punish major media outlets, many of which he accuses of carrying out “fake news” attacks against him.
Reaction: Media Freedom Advocates Push Back
“$10 Billion Is Laughable”: Legal Experts Cast Doubt
Legal and media experts quickly responded with skepticism.
Professor Roy Gutterman, director of the Tully Center for Free Speech at Syracuse University, said:
“Asking for $10 billion almost sounds comical. The plaintiff still must prove that the Journal knowingly published a falsehood, which will be hard given their reputation and legal vetting process.”
While Trump has successfully extracted over $30 million in settlements from outlets like ABC News and Paramount in recent years, those cases were settled out of court — not won in a trial.
Despite the aggressive legal approach, press freedom groups warn that Trump’s lawsuits are creating a chilling effect on investigative journalism, especially around powerful figures and politically sensitive topics.
Trump’s Epstein Dilemma: Secrets, Lists, and Grand Jury Testimony
Trump Orders Attorney General to Unseal Grand Jury Testimony
The lawsuit comes amid growing pressure on Trump from his own supporters to release sealed files related to Jeffrey Epstein’s criminal network.
Epstein — who died in a New York jail in 2019 while awaiting trial for sex trafficking of minors — was a known associate of Trump, as well as numerous high-profile figures. His mysterious death, ruled a suicide, sparked a storm of conspiracy theories about a global elite pedophile ring.
A recent Reuters/Ipsos poll found that 69% of Americans believe the government is hiding Epstein-related information, with only 6% expressing confidence in official accounts.
To dampen mounting suspicion, Trump instructed Attorney General Pam Bondi to file a motion in New York to unseal grand jury testimony from Epstein’s prosecution, citing “extensive public interest.”
However, Bondi also issued a memo earlier this month declaring that “no Epstein client list exists,” contradicting widespread expectations among Trump’s base.
Trump’s Complicated History With Murdoch and the Media
From Tabloid Allies to Courtroom Rivals
The Trump-Murdoch relationship is emblematic of New York’s tabloid era, where flashy headlines and loyalty battles dominated media culture. Murdoch’s Fox News helped catapult Trump to political stardom, but the relationship has become strained in recent years.
Despite hosting Murdoch in the Oval Office in February and calling him an “amazing guy,” Trump has publicly lambasted Murdoch-owned media — especially when coverage turns critical.
This lawsuit may mark a final break in the alliance between the Trump administration and Murdoch’s media empire, which also includes The Times and The Sun.
The Broader Battle: Free Speech vs. Presidential Power
Weaponizing the Courts or Defending Reputation?
Trump has framed this lawsuit as a stand for “every American” who’s been wronged by biased media.
On Truth Social, he wrote:
“This lawsuit is filed not only on behalf of your favorite President, ME, but also in order to continue standing up for ALL Americans who will no longer tolerate the abusive wrongdoings of the Fake News Media.”
Yet critics argue that Trump is weaponizing the legal system to stifle accountability journalism. With the next election looming and his administration under scrutiny for transparency failures on Epstein, this lawsuit is being seen as both a legal and political tactic.
Final Thoughts: What This Means for CEOs, Media Executives, and Lawmakers
High Stakes for Media and Corporate Governance
This lawsuit signals a new level of legal aggression against mainstream media by a sitting president. For media executives and business leaders, it serves as a warning that reporting on powerful figures may now carry serious financial and reputational risk — even if stories are vetted and legally sound.
Key Implications:
-
Media companies must tighten internal legal review processes.
-
Corporate leaders must assess exposure if affiliated with controversial figures.
-
Free speech and libel standards may come under judicial review if the case proceeds to trial.
Whether or not Trump prevails in court, the ripple effects of this lawsuit could reshape the media landscape and redefine the balance between press freedom and defamation law in the U.S.