Breaking: Judge Instantly Dismisses Trump's NY Times Lawsuit

One federal judge read Trump’s 85-page screed and told him, in effect, “This isn’t a lawsuit, it’s a press release.” Good.

Written by Ben Meiselas

I’ve been watching this circus for a long time, and just now, a federal judge in the Middle District of Florida cut through the noise and called Trump’s $15 billion lawsuit against The New York Times what it is: frivolous, improperly pled, and an abuse of our courts.

Look, Trump filed an 85-page document that spends most of its time performing PR for himself, breathless brags about The Apprentice, lists of his properties, long meditations on how “the legacy media” supposedly stole an election, and buries the actual, scant legal claims on page 80. Anyone who’s practiced law knows that’s not how a complaint is supposed to read. A complaint must be a short, plain, direct statement of facts that gives defendants fair notice of the claim against them. This thing was a dossier of grievances. A long-winded press release. Not litigation.

You can read the full court ruling by clicking here, and watch my report above.

U.S. District Judge Merryday, a George H.W. Bush appointee, didn’t mince words. He pointed out rule after rule that the complaint flouted. He described the pleading as a public relations platform, “a megaphone for public relations, or a podium for a passionate oration at a political rally.” He struck it, gave Trump 28 days to file an amended complaint, and capped the rewrite at 40 pages. Shape up or shut up, Donald.

I’m grateful for judges like that. Whether you voted for Trump or loathe him, the courts exist to resolve disputes under the rule of law, not to be used as a political cudgel or a way to bully journalists into silence. Trump’s pattern is clear: when you can’t stomach criticism, drag the media into court and hope the cost and chaos will quiet them. Judges are finally starting to see through the theater. I hope that other media networks who have decided to capitulate to Trump see that too.

This isn’t the first time federal judges have called out this kind of behavior. I’ve repeatedly flagged earlier suits that were thinly veiled attempts to intimidate opponents; judges like Middlebrooks have slapped sanctions down when the filings cross the line. In 2023 Middlebrooks sanctioned Trump and his lawyer for filing a similarly frivolous complaint and warned that repeat abuses of the courts will get real consequences. Those words matter: “Sanctions must never be a hollow gesture. Their bite must be real.”

A quick aside while you are here: I’d love to highlight one of our favorite sponsors who has gone above and beyond to help this network grow—and has allowed us to bring you this video ad-free. Wildgrain has generously sponsored this post. In case you haven’t heard of them, Wildgrain is a great company that delivers artisan breads, pasta & pastries directly to your door. We always have our fridge stocked with their croissants and cookies! We’ve negotiated a discount code: MEIDASTOUCH for our Substack readers for $30 off your first box plus free croissants in every box when you go to Wildgrain.com/meidastouch to start your subscription.

Ok, back to my report.

Why does this matter beyond legal wonkery? Because Trump treats the judiciary like an instrument to be wielded in his political fights. He weaponizes litigation, not for justice, but for revenge and for spectacle. That corrodes faith in public institutions and makes the courts a battleground for vendettas, not fairness. When judges reclaim their role as neutral gatekeepers against that abuse, it’s a win for democracy.

We should also be blunt. This lawsuit was as much about showmanship as about law. It was written like a campaign speech, something directly called out by the judge. If someone wanted to produce a press release, fine. But don’t mislabel it as a legal pleading and expect the federal courts to play along. The judge’s rebuke was a welcome reminder that our system has guardrails. You can’t use Article III courts like a megaphone for grievance theater.

But here’s the problem. Even when judges do the right thing, it doesn’t end the problem. Trump will amend, refile, and keep churning out litigation to punish critics and drain their time and resources. That’s precisely why independent media matters more than ever. Big outlets can sometimes weather legal storms; smaller outlets and independent creators can’t. We need people who will keep reporting, keep explaining what’s happening, and keep holding power to account.

So what can you do? First, stay informed. Don’t let the noise drown out the substance. Judges like Merryday are doing the heavy lifting to protect the integrity of the process; we should notice and value that, not let partisan fury rewrite the narrative. Second, support independent journalism. If you value fearless reporting that won’t be cowed by lawsuits or PR blitzes, subscribe, donate, or share what we do. Independent outlets like ours are built to report, but we can’t do it without your help.

Finally, don’t let your guard down after victories like this. Trump’s pals in the media ecosystem will still spin this, and he’ll keep trying to gaslight, litigate, and litigate again. We need to keep calling it out every time. Judges striking frivolous suits is a hopeful sign. But vigilance from citizens and a populace unafraid to speak truth to power is what turns one judge’s good ruling into a real check on abuse.

I’m proud to see the judiciary push back where it counts. This was a small but meaningful moment of accountability. Let’s not let it be an isolated one.

To support reporting like this, hit subscribe if you haven’t yet, share this video, and consider becoming a paid member to keep independent coverage strong and ad-free. Judges can strike down nonsense in court; together, we make sure the truth doesn’t get buried in the noise.