
Trump's WSJ lawsuit is as dangerous as it is unprecedented
Trump's unprecedented step came in the context of his heightened sensitivity about anything having to do with Jeffrey Epstein, the infamous deceased child sexual abuser. On July 17, The Wall Street Journal triggered the suit when it published an article that claimed Trump had sent Epstein a 'lewd' birthday card in 2003 when the latter turned 50 years old.
Trump reacted almost immediately, filing suit the next day seeking $10 billion in damages. But he has his eyes on something even bigger than that suit — namely the possibility of weakening the Constitution's protection of press freedom.
His lawsuit alleges that the Journal's article was an attempt to 'inextricably link President Trump to Epstein' and that the Journal 'falsely claim[ed] that the salacious language of the letter is contained within a hand-drawn naked woman, which was created with a heavy marker.' The president claims that the newspaper 'failed to attach the alleged drawing, failed to show proof that President Trump authored or signed any such letter, and failed to explain how this purported letter was obtained.'
His lawsuit charges that with 'malicious intent … Defendants concocted this story to malign President Trump's character and integrity and deceptively portray him in a false light.' Those allegations tee up the constitutional battle that the president wants to wage.
Trump's suit against the Journal has already reaped benefits, redirecting Epstein-related ire from the MAGA base away from him. His supporters now have a familiar target: the press and its alleged persecution of the president.
In addition, it is an important step in Trump's long-running desire to get the United States Supreme Court to reverse decades of precedent and make it easier for public figures to win libel and defamation suits against newspapers and other media outlets. Like other strongman leaders, if he can't control the media directly, he wants to coerce and intimidate it. Relaxing its legal protection is one way to accomplish that goal.
In the 2016 campaign, Trump promised: 'One of the things I'm going to do if I win, I'm going to open up our libel law so when they (the press) write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money.'
He has failed so far to deliver on that promise. But as we know, he is not easily dissuaded.
Newspapers, radio or television stations that have the audacity not to do the president's bidding must be made to pay a price, with the hope that others will seek to avoid that fate by censoring themselves. Trump's quick and unprecedented resort to the courts sends a clear message to any media outlet that crosses him.
He may be feeling good, but the rest of us should not be.
As Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1786: 'Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.' He went on to note that 'To the sacrifice, of time, labor, fortune, a public servant must count upon adding that of peace of mind and even reputation. And all this is preferable to European bondage. '
Almost 200 years later, Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black reiterated Jefferson's sentiment. 'The Founding Fathers gave the free press the protection it must have to fulfill its essential role in our democracy,' he explained. 'The press was to serve the governed, not the governors.' Turmp wants exactly the opposite.
Seven years before Black wrote those lines, the Supreme Court, in another classic defense of press freedom, made it very hard for public figures to win defamation suits against news outlets of the kind Trump filed on Friday.
'To sustain a claim of defamation or libel,' the court said, 'the First Amendment requires that the plaintiff show that the defendant knew that a statement was false or was reckless in deciding to publish the information without investigating whether it was accurate.'
Justice William Brennan explained that America's 'profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open' meant 'that it may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials.'
Echoing Jefferson, he added, 'Injury to official reputation affords no more warrant for repressing speech that would otherwise be free than does factual error.'
Since 1964, public figures have found it nearly impossible to succeed in cases like the one Trump filed on Friday. Whether he or the Journal loses in the lower courts, the president may be hoping that his case will make its way to the Supreme Court so it can again come to his rescue and do his bidding. Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch have already indicated their belief that the court's 1964 decision and its actual malice standard should be overruled.
So, keep an eye on what happens to Trump's suit against The Wall Street Journal. The Journal's fate will be important in shaping the fate of the freedom of all Americans.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Newsweek
a few seconds ago
- Newsweek
Donald Trump's Approval Rating Changes Direction in Poll
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Donald Trump's approval rating has reversed course after weeks of decline, according to a new poll. The latest Morning Consult survey shows Trump's approval rising to 47 percent, up 2 points from the previous week, while his disapproval dropped to 50 percent, down 2 points. His net approval rating has improved from -7 points to -3 points. The poll was conducted between July 25-27 among 2,202 registered voters and had a margin of error of +/- 2 percentage points. President Donald Trump gestures as he meets European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in Turnberry, Scotland, on July 27, 2025. President Donald Trump gestures as he meets European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in Turnberry, Scotland, on July 27, 2025. Jacquelyn Martin/AP Why It Matters It comes as polls have shown Trump's approval rating on a downward trajectory in recent weeks amid scrutiny over his handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case from Democrats and even his own supporters. The renewed focus began on July 6, when the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the FBI stated that Epstein had "no incriminating 'client list'" and died by suicide—contradicting earlier claims by Attorney General Pam Bondi, who later walked back her remarks. Scrutiny grew after The Wall Street Journal reported that Bondi told Trump his name appeared in Epstein's files, a claim both deny. Since then, there have been calls from both sides of the aisle to release the Epstein files. Despite this, polls show Trump's popularity has started to recover. What To Know Newsweek's approval tracker also reflects a modest uptick, showing Trump's net approval at -6 (45 percent approve, 51 percent disapprove), up from -7 at the end of last week and -10 earlier in the week. But Morning Consult's findings show that the Epstein case continues to dominate public attention. According to the poll, 75 percent of voters say they have recently seen or heard something about Epstein, including 42 percent who've heard "a lot." Though detailed developments—such as a DOJ meeting with Ghislaine Maxwell, a House vote to subpoena Epstein-related files, and WSJ's reporting about Bondi—are less widely recognized, with around 60 percent of voters reporting having heard about at least one of these angles. Meanwhile, public sentiment around trade and the economy has modestly improved, according to Morning Consult's poll. But Trump's August 1 tariff deadline for foreign governments to reach trade deals with the U.S. could threaten that. The potential impact is significant. If deals are not reached, tariffs on U.S. food imports are scheduled to rise for over 80 countries—affecting nearly 75 percent of all U.S. food imports and likely leading to higher prices for consumers, according to the Tax Foundation. Julie Robbins, CEO of Earthquaker Devices, an Ohio-based manufacturer, told the BBC: "I view the tariffs and the current trade war policy as the largest threat to our business…People have sort of moved on, but now they're going to be reinstated in August—it's going to be right back where we were." But few voters appear focused on Trump's August 1 tariff deadline for foreign governments to reach trade deals with the U.S. Only 23 percent say they've heard "a lot" about it, and just 21 percent think imposing tariffs should be a "top priority." Approval Ratings Show Signs of Stagnation Despite modest gains, many polls show Trump's approval rating remains stuck within a narrow range. McLaughlin & Associates, Quantus Insights, RMG Research, and Emerson College all show his approval holding steady between 46 and 52 percent in recent months, with little movement in net approval. However, other surveys have shown Trump's net approval dropping to its lowest point of his second term. Navigator Research puts Trump at 42 percent approval and 54 percent disapproval, while Gallup and The Bullfinch Group report even lower ratings, with net approval as low as -21.


Fox News
a few seconds ago
- Fox News
Dept. of Education launches investigation into Duke University over alleged racial preferences
The Department of Education announced on Monday that it is launching an investigation into Duke University and Duke Law Journal over alleged racial biases in selecting new editors. The Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) cited reports that the Law Journal circulated a packet to school "affinity groups" in 2024 regarding the application process to join the Journal in the new year. Each applicant was asked to write a 12-page memo analyzing an appellate court decision and a 500-word personal statement which would be judged on a points-based grading system along with their first-year GPA. However, applicants from these "affinity groups" were reportedly given the opportunity to receive extra points if their statements referenced their "race or ethnicity" and up to 10 points for describing how their "membership in an underrepresented group" promoted "diverse voices." The OCR believes that this action could be a potential violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. "If Duke illegally gives preferential treatment to law journal or medical school applicants based on those students' immutable characteristics, that is an affront not only to civil rights law, but to the meritocratic character of academic excellence," Secretary of Education Linda McMahon said in a statement. "Blatantly discriminatory practices that are illegal under the Constitution, antidiscrimination law, and Supreme Court precedent have become all too common in our educational institutions. The Trump Administration will not allow them to continue." McMahon, along with Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr., sent a joint letter to Duke University requesting the school "review all policies and practices at Duke Health for the illegal use of race preferences, take immediate action to reform all of those that unlawfully take account of race or ethnicity to bestow benefits or advantages, and provide clear and verifiable assurances to the government that Duke's new policies will be implemented faithfully going forward—including by making all necessary organizational, leadership, and personnel changes to ensure the necessary reforms will be durable." The department is also requesting Duke University set up a "Merit and Civil Rights Committee" to help resolve further civil rights violations. Fox News Digital reached out to Duke University and Duke Law Journal for comment but did not immediately receive a response. Duke University has come under fire multiple times for racial preferences and pushes for diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) in the past year. Last year, Fox News Digital reported on a 2021 plan titled "Dismantling Racism and Advancing Equity, Diversity and Inclusion in the School of Medicine" for Duke Medical School. The guide called out standards such as dress codes, timeliness and individualism as examples of "White supremacy culture." Dr. Kendall Conger also told Fox News Digital in 2024 that he was fired from Duke University's health system after speaking against the university's pledge against racism, which called racism a "public health crisis." "It wasn't so much a pledge to better medicine, but a pledge to left-wing ideology. And so, I felt if I did not say anything, I was giving tacit approval to what was in the pledge," Conger said at the time.


USA Today
29 minutes ago
- USA Today
Jessica Williams returns to 'The Daily Show' to roast Trump
"The Daily Show" is welcoming back a familiar face. Host Jon Stewart threw cameras mid-monologue to Jessica Williams, a famed alum of the political satire program, on Monday, July 28. Williams, fresh off an Emmy nod for her role in Apple TV+'s "Shrinking," served as a regular correspondent on "The Daily Show" from 2012 to 2016. Back at her old stomping ground, Williams, 35, took aim at President Donald Trump, joking that he was using notable Black people to distract from a refusal to release the "Epstein Files." "Trump is trying to throw every Black person he can think (of) in front of the scandal to distract us," Williams quipped. "First, he released the Martin Luther King Jr. files. Then he accused Obama of treason. And now he wants to prosecute Oprah and Beyoncé?" How did new 'Daily Show' host do? Our quick take on Josh Johnson's debut Williams' comments come as the Trump administration continues to weather a scandal over the investigation into convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. Throughout his run for office, the president speculated that the government was withholding key evidence after the financier died by suicide in a New York jail cell before making it to trial. Now in office, however, the president has opted not to release further information, and the Department of Justice has maintained that there was no elusive "client list," with notable names who associated with Epstein. The move has angered some of Trump's most loyal supporters, and provided fodder for over a week of late-night monologues. Trump, Williams joked, was targeting "all of our greatest Black people," in order to distract from the scandal. "Who's next? Michael Jordan? Michael B. Jordan? Michael C. Jordan?" she continued. "We're about a week away from him saying that Urkel did 9/11. Urkel? Did he do that?" She then wondered aloud if she would be next, quipping that recent Emmy nominations might just make her famous enough to be a target. Williams, who has since ventured into more serious dramatic roles, occasionally swings by "The Daily Show" to remind audiences of her comedic prowess. She is one of several comics and actors who arrived in Hollywood after a stint on the Comedy Central program.