Facebook
Britain's News Portal
Around The Clock
BREAKING
Loading latest headlines…

Trump's £3bn Washington Post Defamation Lawsuit Dismissed by US Judge

A US federal judge has rejected Donald Trump's £3 billion defamation claim against The Washington Post. The lawsuit concerned a 2023 article alleging a bank with links to the adult entertainment industry helped fund Trump's media venture.

  • US judge Thomas Patrick Barber dismissed Donald Trump's £3 billion defamation lawsuit against The Washington Post.
  • The lawsuit stemmed from a 2023 article which claimed a bank tied to the pornography industry helped finance Trump Media and Technology Group (TMTG).
  • The judge ruled that TMTG failed to provide clear evidence that The Post acted with 'actual malice'.
  • This marks another legal setback for Trump in his series of lawsuits against various media organisations.
  • The Washington Post issued a correction in May regarding details of a 'finder's fee' mentioned in its original article.

A £3 billion defamation lawsuit filed by Donald Trump against The Washington Post has been dismissed by a US judge, casting further doubt on the former President's efforts to silence critical media scrutiny. In a significant blow to his litigious campaign, District Court Judge Thomas Patrick Barber granted summary judgment to the newspaper, ruling that Trump Media and Technology Group (TMTG) had failed to present sufficient evidence of actual malice, a crucial standard in US defamation law.

The case centred on a 2023 article published by The Washington Post, which reported that a bank with connections to the pornography industry had assisted in funding Trump's nascent social media operation, later rebranded as Truth Social. While the lawsuit alleged that the newspaper had acted with "egregious malice" and engaged in a "years-long crusade" against Trump, Judge Barber concluded that this argument lacked substance.

The decision represents one of several recent legal setbacks for Donald Trump in his ongoing efforts to sue media outlets over articles he has deemed unfavourable. In April, another Florida judge dismissed a case against The Wall Street Journal regarding a story about a letter allegedly written by Trump to the late financier Jeffrey Epstein. Moreover, an initial £12 billion claim against The New York Times and Penguin book publishers was also dismissed, although an amended complaint was later filed.

The Washington Post's original article reported that TMTG had sourced funds from an obscure financial entity linked to a Caribbean-island bank with ties to the adult entertainment industry. Furthermore, the newspaper claimed that TMTG and its publicly traded merger partner failed to disclose a £190,000 "finder's fee" for arranging a £6.3 million loan deal to shareholders or SEC regulators.

In response to the lawsuit, The Washington Post welcomed Judge Barber's decision, stating through a spokesperson: “We are pleased with the court’s ruling and look forward to reviewing its written order upon release.”

Why this matters: This case highlights the challenges public figures face in proving defamation against media outlets in the US, particularly the high bar of 'actual malice'. It contributes to the ongoing discourse about media accountability and freedom of the press in a significant Western democracy.

What this means for you: What this means for you: While this specific legal battle is US-centric, it reflects broader global debates about media truthfulness and the legal rights of public figures. For UK citizens, it reinforces the different legal frameworks for defamation, with the UK having a generally lower bar for proving libel compared to the US 'actual malice' standard.

Related Articles

Get the news that matters.

Join thousands of readers getting the best of British news straight to their inbox.