A federal judge in Manhattan dismissed a preemptive lawsuit filed by journalist Michael Wolff against First Lady Melania Trump on Wednesday, rejecting his attempt to block her anticipated $1 billion defamation claim tied to statements he made about her alleged association with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil of U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York called Wolff’s legal strategy “contorted” and declined to let federal court oversee the dispute, instead directing it back to state court where it would be handled like any other case. Vyskocil characterized the filing as “an inappropriate level of tactical gamesmanship” and said she would not be “drafted to oversee an abusively presented spat,” yet acknowledged both sides have legitimate grievances.
What Happened
Wolff filed his lawsuit in October after Melania Trump’s legal team sent him a cease-and-desist letter demanding he delete statements about her and warning of an impending $1 billion defamation suit. Wolff’s attorney then moved the case to federal court, arguing jurisdiction existed there. On Wednesday, Judge Vyskocil agreed federal courts had jurisdiction but exercised her discretion to dismiss the case and return it to state court, where Melania Trump is expected to file her defamation action.
The dispute centers on claims Wolff made in media interviews and in his published work regarding the first lady’s relationship to Epstein, who died in custody in 2019 while awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges. The Daily Beast retracted an article last summer titled “Melania Trump ‘Very Involved’ in Epstein Scandal: Author” after receiving a legal letter from Melania Trump’s lawyer, Alejandro Brito.
In the original interview underlying that retracted piece, Wolff said the first lady was “behind the scenes” addressing the Epstein matter at the White House, though he clarified she was not involved in criminal activity. Wolff’s lawsuit asserted that some of his statements were taken out of context and that others constituted protected opinion, particularly his characterization of the Trump marriage as a “sham” arrangement.
The Reaction
A spokesperson for Melania Trump said the first lady “is proud to continue standing up to, and fighting against, those who spread malicious and defamatory falsehoods as they desperately try to get undeserved attention and money from their unlawful conduct.” Melania Trump’s legal team previously argued that Wolff’s statements caused her “overwhelming reputational and financial harm.”
The first lady addressed the controversy publicly in April, saying, “The lies linking me with the disgraceful Jeffrey Epstein need to end today.” She added that those making false claims were “devoid of ethical standards, humility, and respect” and that she rejected their “mean-spirited attempts to defame my reputation.”
Wolff’s filing characterized the threatened lawsuit as part of a pattern by the president and first lady to silence critics through costly legal action. He argued in court documents that some statements were protected speech and that he never accused Melania Trump of involvement in criminal activity connected to Epstein.
What This Means
The dismissal removes a legal hurdle that may have complicated Melania Trump’s path to filing her defamation claim. With the federal case now closed, the dispute is expected to proceed through New York state courts under standard civil litigation rules. The outcome suggests judges are skeptical of preemptive lawsuits designed to block anticipated claims before they materialize.
Melania Trump has also called for congressional action on the broader issue, urging lawmakers to address the distribution of non-consensual intimate imagery and to create opportunities for Epstein victims to testify under oath. The case reflects ongoing legal tensions between public figures seeking to protect their reputations and journalists defending the scope of protected speech in the digital age.
