In a major legal setback for Donald Trump, a New York Supreme Court judge has decisively thrown out the former president's $100 million lawsuit against The New York Times. The case, which centred on the newspaper's Pulitzer Prize-winning investigation into his tax history, was dismissed in its entirety.
Justice Robert R. Reed ruled that the Times' reporting, which was based on confidential documents provided by Mr Trump's niece, Mary Trump, was firmly protected under the First Amendment's guarantees of freedom of the press. The judge stated that news organisations engaging in 'routine and often essential journalism' must be shielded from legal retribution for publishing newsworthy information, even if it was obtained unlawfully by a source.
The Core of the Dispute
The legal battle stemmed from the Times' 2018 'Trump Engaged in Suspect Tax Schemes as He Reaped Riches From His Father' exposé. The investigation revealed intricate financial manoeuvres and alleged tax avoidance within the Trump family, profoundly damaging the businessman-turned-politician's self-crafted image as a self-made billionaire.
Mr Trump's legal team argued that the newspaper and reporters Susanne Craig, David Barstow, and Russell Buettner had conspired with Mary Trump to breach a confidentiality agreement she had signed two decades earlier regarding the family's estate. They alleged this constituted an 'insidious plot' against him.
A Resounding Victory for Press Freedom
The judge's ruling was a clear affirmation of journalistic rights. Justice Reed wrote that 'freedom of the press is the foundation of our democracy' and that applying legal liability for publishing such a story would 'eviscerate' those crucial protections.
A spokesperson for The New York Times hailed the decision as a 'triumph for the free press and for the public's right to know'. They emphasised that the reporting, which won a Pulitzer Prize, was 'in the public interest' and performed a vital service for American voters.
While the lawsuit against the journalists was dismissed, a separate breach of contract claim against Mary Trump is permitted to proceed, as she was a direct party to the confidentiality agreement.
