Another day, another Trump lawsuit tossed. For anyone actually curious, it’s worth skimming the judge’s opinion instead of headlines, the legal reasoning is usually way less dramatic than the tweets about it.
1790
k_realtor5 days ago
+348
I wish there a TACO filter. A way the news can stop with Trump "Promises, Sues, Threatens, Thinks, Says, Tries, Attempts, Slams, Promotes, Agrees, Says, Will make A Deal, defends..."
it's all really just bs and self-promotion unless there's real action to something, isn't it.
348
InstructionPurple9115 days ago
+51
On my desktop, anytime Trump's name appears on web pages, it is **automatically** changed to drumpf. I have no idea why this happens, but maybe this can help you.
51
YimmyGhey5 days ago
+42
Lol I remember that browser extension, I think John Oliver had something to do with it back in 2016
42
Traveling_Solo5 days ago
+9
Fairly sure that's his old family name :v
9
huhwhuh5 days ago
+6
I would definitely respond to Trump Croaks.
6
rir25 days ago
+4
He’s a true believer in *any press is good press* and I wish it weren’t true but it seems to work on MAGA.
4
xeen3135 days ago
+3
New app idea. Taco filter
3
camshun75 days ago
+55
yeah, the 'legal reason' was that he was talking absolute shite, defied gravity with his flying bullshit, yeah 'legal reason', was 'yer a f****** d***', is that in the correct parlance?
55
bobandgeorge5 days ago
+72
>In his ruling, Gayles said he had to dismiss the complaint because Trump had "not plausibly alleged that the Defendants published the Article with actual malice".
You were close.
72
kkrko5 days ago
+51
Mind "Actual Malice" is a legal term. If you're a public figure, like, say, a reality tv show host, you're held to a higher standard to prove defamation. You need to not only prove that what they're saying to you is false, you also need to prove that the person defaming you knew or should have known it was false.
51
camshun75 days ago
+10
Wasnt aware of that, thank you
10
Darsint5 days ago
+13
What’s funny is that the Supreme Court case that determined that “actual malice” was necessary for public figures was…*New York Times v Sullivan*.
There’s no way that Trump won’t appeal this because he absolutely wants to destroy that case. He wants to be able to sue media outlets that say nasty true things about him.
13
kkrko5 days ago
+12
>He wants to be able to sue media outlets that say nasty true things about him.
Nah, that's not what removing the actual malice standard would do. Actual Malice changes libel from "a speaker saying false things that defame a person" to "a speaker who says things that *they know or should have known* are false to defame a person". Truth always remains as absolute defense against libel.
12
LiveNet27235 days ago
+3
This was established in the [New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964) ](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/376/254/).
3
TheBigCore5 days ago
+35
Trump doesn't care if these lawsuits fail. The whole point is "The Process Is the Punishment", making his enemies waste time and money fighting these bogus legal actions.
35
iamstephen11285 days ago
+16
This and the fact that the suits failing is somehow "proof" to his loyalists that he's being mistreated...
16
FreeUsePolyDaddy5 days ago
+7
They engage in utterly insane flights of "logic".
7
JustHereForCookies175 days ago
+2
It's only "lawfare" when it doesn't benefit their side.
2
Surullian5 days ago
+6
Everything is less dramatic than he tweets about.
6
strangerzero3 days ago
+1
It is called lawfare, hassle people and make them spend money on lawyers travel etc. with frivolous cases.
1
[deleted]5 days ago
+451
[deleted]
451
boxoffoxsocks5 days ago
+134
Yeaaaahhh I hadn't really connected those pieces until you said this. The hell kind of scheme is that where he can't be held accountable\* for his actions in office but he can sue the shit out of anyone.
\*changed responsible to accountable
134
allanbc4 days ago
+2
Thing is, the President can actually be held accountable, but the process is different. He has to be impeached and removed first. This is part of those checks and balances Americans do often tout, or used to, before Trump demonstrated how utterly impotent they are in practice.
It's actually not uncommon for Presidents or even members of ruling bodies to be immediately above the law - however, there will usually be a way to get past that. For example, Denmark had a former Minister investigated and held responsible for human rights violations a few years ago - for separating couples of asylum seekers where the female partner was underage.
2
UbiSububi85 days ago
+84
And it’s malicious. Designed to cost the company time and money.
That has a chilling effect. Rupert Murdoch can afford to spend millions to defend against a suit from Trump.
Can a small paper? Can a small town? Can a regular American?
84
[deleted]5 days ago
+39
[deleted]
39
tooshpright5 days ago
+12
Probably not as much as the golf weekends.
12
JustHereForCookies175 days ago
+1
Or the East Wing remodel, military parade, Arc de Drumpf, Kennedy Center remodel, F1 race, etc...
And that's just the shit he's doing IN DC.
1
tompear825 days ago
+25
At the very least there should be a law that states that you can't file a lawsuit after you've already filed a certain number of frivolous lawsuits. He shouldn't be able to use the court system to waste others time and resources
25
centipededamascus5 days ago
+20
There is, actually. Federal courts can label you a "vexatious litigant", which restricts your right to file lawsuits.
20
tompear825 days ago
+14
Why the f*** has that not happened to him yet?
14
centipededamascus5 days ago
+10
Well as I understand it, basically someone who has been sued by Trump like this has to sue him in Federal court and ask them to do that. It doesn't seem like anyone has stepped up to take that step yet.
10
tompear825 days ago
+9
See, that is too high of a bar to clear for our legal system. It shouldn't be on a victim of his to counter sue and take the hit on legal fees.
9
Visual_Bridge69255 days ago
+7
Idk how it would apply to this situation, but assholes who file blatantly frivolous lawsuits are often made to pay the other side's legal fees as a punishment.
7
Wyrmnax4 days ago
+1
Problem is
Suppose you say "I dont like cheetos"
Trump somehow says thats about him and sues you for defamation.
Do you have the $1k dollars to pay upfront for a lawyer to fight that case in court? The time it will take to find that lawyer, get to him, have a deposition, all the days it will take in court? And - even worse - all the expenses it will incur in the 0.0001% chance he wins the case against you?
This is why slap suits work. The other side simply does not have the means to be fighting those frivolous lawsuits
1
Visual_Bridge69254 days ago
+1
If Trump sues me I'll defend myself, he, and his lawyers, have all proven to be completely incompetent, they literally cannot read the laws, let alone attempt to make actual legal arguments.
Not to mention, if Trump sued anyone for something that frivolous lawyers would line up to defend them pro-bono.
1
FreeUsePolyDaddy5 days ago
+1
I think there is also the concept of barretry, but the jeapordy there would be on the attorneys, not the client.
1
bolt_in_blue5 days ago
+13
I think we also need a constitutional amendment to make it clear that the sitting president loses many of their rights as a private citizen while in office. The president should not be permitted to personally sue anyone while in office.
13
JerryDipotosBurner5 days ago
+286
> Trump's lawyer told CBS News, the BBC's US news partner, that the president will refile the "powerhouse" suit.
> US District Judge Darrin Gayles said Trump came "nowhere close" to showing the WSJ acted with actual malice towards him, which is the threshold for defamation cases in the US.
This is far from over. They’ll re-file, it’ll get tossed or something, they’ll appeal all the way to SCOTUS somehow.
286
Osiris325 days ago
+34
This won't make it that far. He can refile, but if it keeps getting tossed, it will never go further than district court. You can't go up the ladder of the court system on just a dismissal, it has to be dismissed with prejudice and then you have to appeal *the fact that it was dismissed with prejudice* before you can then actually try the case.
If they refile, it all depends on the SOL, since that clock does not stop when the suit is filed. They may well be out of time.
34
Fried_puri5 days ago
+2
Yeah their threat is all hot air. Luckily for them, the public has the collective memory of a goldfish so even when they quietly end this pointless endeavor no one will call them out for it.
2
Horknut15 days ago
+15
There is no way SCOTUS takes on this case. Yes, they're the worst ever. But no way.
15
XayahTheVastaya5 days ago
+87
And since the SCOTUS made it so the one person in our country that most needs to be bound by law is above the law, that might actually work out for him.
87
Anteater7765 days ago
+26
He can do no crime but it’s a crime to hurt his feefees
26
Danger_Fluff5 days ago
+3
If he does, I reaaaaaaaaaaaally hope the next group of lawyers will take it through discovery.
3
Sweatytubesock5 days ago
+70
There has never been a parasite in human history like Trump. He’s in his own galaxy.
70
CHEVIEWER14 days ago
+1
Orange parasite indeed.
1
che-che-chester5 days ago
+18
I think Trump files these bullshit lawsuits to back up his claims of "fake news". It costs him very little to file a suit that will never make it to court. He gets to post on Truth Social that he's suing the WSJ and other conservative news outlets will amplify the story. Nobody will see this story about the suit being tossed.
It's the same reason why Trump and MAGA wanted to do endless election recounts in 2020. The fact that they're doing a recount at all implies there was a potential problem. In reality, there was never a legit reason to do any recounts in 2020.
Also, I think most of us would agree that any POTUS deserves *some level* of protection against lawsuits while in office. But that should work both ways. If POTUS wants to file lawsuits while in office, that should void their protection from lawsuits.
18
Laskeese5 days ago
+13
100% it's about propaganda and discrediting reliable news sources. He tells his supporters "those bad people are being mean to me and I'm suing them for it". As far as his supporters are concerned the suit legitimizes his crying and they shun that news source forever and they're so deep in their echo chamber that they never actually see that the result of the suit was that it had literally zero merit or they do see it and Trump just says "ya that judge is in on it too" and now he's discrediting the legal system as well as whatever news organization and it just drives his supporters deeper into the echo chamber.
13
Vann_Accessible5 days ago
+14
Get in, losers! We’re goin’ losin’!
14
zedkyuu5 days ago
+19
Wonder when we’ll see the EO about preserving national and presidential pride that makes it illegal to say anything bad about the US government. And since the Trump org is the US government…
19
r0ryp5 days ago
+2
Yeah The Boys current season hits a little too close to home with that one…
2
aluke0005 days ago
+5
For all these frivolous lawsuits, judges should be requiring them to fully pay for the defense lawyers fees. But then again they would just use our tax dollars to pay any fines or fees anyway.
5
Hopalong_Manboobs5 days ago
+11
Dismissed because King Pedo definitely did write and send Epstein a bday card mentioning their shared “wonderful secret.”
[which was raping kids]
11
NeighborhoodFew77795 days ago
+3
The prepubescent breasts illustrated are just the vomit on top of this shit sundae.
Such a vile and repellent man... yet 70M plus Americans think he's just the best ever.
3
_Kramerica_3 days ago
+2
I’ll continue to say it, I don’t think as many people voted for him as the numbers tell us. Elon rigged that shit for him.
2
RobutNotRobot5 days ago
+4
Just another reminder that Trump raped kids.
4
Time-Industry-13645 days ago
+5
Important for people to remember that he typically only files these lawsuits to intimidate people, exhaust their financial resources or just to be a vindictive pest.
Generally, he doesn't have any intention of actually following through with the suit or other legal proceedings. They are not filed in good faith most of the time.
I wish we had some kind of system in place to prevent him doing this because it is unfortunately a very reliable and effective method of silencing or harassing people.
5
SoftlySpokenPromises5 days ago
+3
At what point do judges start to label him a vexatious litigant? This has gone on for decades now!
3
NightchadeBackAgain5 days ago
+5
Yup. Trump must hate the Constitution so much, lol
5
fakieTreFlip5 days ago
+11
I don't think he cares, to be honest. These suits are obviously all frivolous. The goal likely isn't to win, but to intimidate and waste people's time and money
11
korkythecat3334 days ago
+1
Yes, also it gives the impression that there are "two sides to the story"
1
Eddfan365 days ago
+1
His goal is to push and the break the constitution.
1
Niceromancer5 days ago
+3
Sadly the damage has already been done.
3
Existien5 days ago
+3
Judge: "noch so ein Mist und du bist dismissed"
3
Jumpstart_4115 days ago
+3
This is a wasted of American resource, more pressing matter were ignored.
3
IMGcertified5 days ago
+3
That's because Bezoz already paid him in the form of Melania Movie
3
Blubbolo5 days ago
+2
At what time do we expect the meltdown on truth?
2
PigFarmer15 days ago
+3
About 03:00 tomorrow morning.
3
Island_Monkey865 days ago
+2
Can they just dismiss the orange oaf so we can live normal lives again?
2
Fomdoo5 days ago
+2
You know he has no idea how much money is worth. $10B for that lawsuit. That's insane.
2
Jenetyk5 days ago
+2
Another win for the billable hour.
2
Odd-Syllabub-36425 days ago
+2
Someone with a long legal history of bankruptcies and suing others sounds like a shady guy to put in charge of a country. What a ghetto, scandalous administration
2
Cyrano_Knows5 days ago
+2
Trump was the most litigious (malicious) business owner by far before coming president. He weaponized and used the court system to bully creditors and competitors and anything he disliked.
And now, as President, he's basically made it so he can't be prosecuted and sitting presidents can't be sued for civil liability.
So basically Trump sues everybody left and right, including the government he oversees and can't be sued back.
F****** deplorable and pathetic.
2
ZenBreaking5 days ago
+2
Toss it back up on the front page again
2
SubstantialNature3685 days ago
+2
It is literally impossible to defame Donny Raper.
2
Phenomenon1015 days ago
+4
let me guess. hes going to go crying to the supreme corrupt court?
4
Known_Appointment6045 days ago
+2
These dismissals don’t even need to be reported. They are just assumed. Let us know if one gets through.
2
Ayotha5 days ago
+1
Meh it's good to know the bigger ones. better then thinking he gets away with even more then what he should.
America . . .
1
ZenRage5 days ago
+1
If you are news journal that publishes an article about a dismissal without linking to the court's own ruling, you are bad at journalism and should feel bad.
https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/trump-v-wsj-dismissal.pdf
1
Salamok5 days ago
+1
Wait you mean they guy we all thought was full of shit is full of shit? I am shocked!!!
83 Comments