Trump Files Amended $15 Billion Defamation Lawsuit

Donald Trump has submitted a revised version of his substantial $15 billion defamation complaint against The New York Times and book publisher Penguin Random House, along with several of its journalists. This action follows a federal judge’s dismissal of the former president’s initial lawsuit last month, which was deemed procedurally improper.

The new 40-page filing was submitted on Thursday, adhering to a 28-day window granted by U.S. District Court Judge Steven Merryday in Florida. Judge Merryday had previously rejected Trump’s original complaint on September 19, citing its failure to meet basic pleading standards under federal civil procedure rules.

The Refiled Allegations

The amended complaint maintains the hefty demand for $15 billion in compensatory damages, mirroring the initial filing. Additionally, it seeks “punitive damages in an amount to be determined upon trial of this action,” indicating Trump’s intent to pursue further financial penalties should the case proceed.

While the core defendants remain The New York Times and Penguin Random House, there have been slight adjustments to the individual journalists named. The original lawsuit specifically targeted investigative reporters Suzanne Craig, Russ Buettner, and Michael S. Schmidt, alongside Peter Baker, the Times’s chief White House correspondent at the time. The amended document notably omits Michael S. Schmidt from the list of individual defendants, retaining Craig, Buettner, and Baker.

The revised complaint aims to address the judge’s previous criticisms by presenting a more structured case. It includes an itemized list detailing dozens of specific allegations, each tied to particular publications and statements that Trump’s legal team contends are defamatory. This approach is a direct response to Judge Merryday’s call for clarity and conciseness.

Judge Merryday’s Prior Scrutiny

Judge Merryday’s decision to toss the initial lawsuit was not based on the merits or truthfulness of Trump’s claims but on its format and structure. He specifically invoked Rule 8(a) of the federal rules of civil procedure, which mandates that a complaint contain “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.”

In his disqualifying order, Judge Merryday sharply criticized the original 85-page document. “Alleging only two simple counts of defamation, the complaint consumes 85 pages,” he wrote, pointing out that “Count one appears on page 80, and count two appears on page 83.” He concluded that “Even under the most generous and lenient application of rule 8, the complaint is decidedly improper and impermissible.”

The judge further noted the “many, often repetitive, and laudatory (toward President Trump) but superfluous allegations,” and described the filing as containing “much more, persistently alleged in abundant, florid, and enervating detail.” He emphasized that a complaint is not the appropriate venue for “the tedious and burdensome aggregation of prospective evidence, for the rehearsal of tendentious arguments, or for the protracted recitation and explanation of legal authority putatively supporting the pleader’s claim for relief.”

The refiling of this high-stakes defamation lawsuit signals Trump’s continued resolve to pursue his claims against The New York Times. The legal battle now shifts to whether this amended complaint satisfies the procedural requirements that tripped up its predecessor, allowing the substantive arguments to eventually be heard.

Source: The Guardian