Judge Mary – A federal judge in Manhattan dismissed author Michael Wolff’s lawsuit targeting first lady Melania Trump, saying his effort to block her from pursuing a $1 billion defamation claim “is not how the federal courts work.” The ruling came as Wolff argued his remar
For Michael Wolff, the fight started with a warning letter—then escalated into a bid for federal court to stop what he described as a threat of a $1 billion lawsuit. On Friday, that attempt collapsed.
U.S. District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil. appointed by President Donald Trump. threw out Wolff’s case against first lady Melania Trump in federal court in Manhattan. In a 45-page decision. she said Wolff’s “contorted” approach to keep her from suing him for $1 billion over his statements “is not how the federal courts work.”.
Vyskocil also criticized both sides for what she called an “inappropriate level of tactical gamesmanship. ” and said she “will not be conscripted to oversee an abusively presented spat.” While the judge agreed that Wolff and the first lady “have a real dispute. ” she said it must be fought “according to the same procedures as everyone else. ” ultimately “dismisses this case to be litigated like any other.”.
The legal back-and-forth traces to October, when Wolff sued Melania Trump after her lawyer, Alejandro Brito, told him that she would be “left with no alternative” but to sue if he didn’t retract statements Brito said had caused her “overwhelming reputational and financial harm.”
Wolff first filed the lawsuit in New York state court. Brito then had the case transferred to federal court. Vyskocil acknowledged that federal court had jurisdiction, but declined to exercise it, sending the dispute along under ordinary federal procedures.
Nick Clemens, a spokesperson for Melania Trump, said the first lady “is proud to continue standing up to, and fighting against, those who spread malicious and defamatory falsehoods as they desperately try to get undeserved attention and money from their unlawful conduct.”
The judge’s ruling also pointed back to the sharp disagreement behind the lawsuit: Wolff argued the Trumps “have made a practice of threatening those who speak against them” with costly legal actions “to silence their speech. to intimidate their critics generally. and to extract unjustified payments and North Korean style confessions and apologies.” In Friday’s decision. the threats were “designed to create a climate of fear in the nation so that people cannot freely or confidently exercise their First Amendment rights. ” according to the lawsuit.
Melania Trump’s own public response sharpened the backdrop. In April. she made a statement at the White House denying any affiliation with Jeffrey Epstein. the millionaire financier and convicted sex offender who killed himself in jail in August 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. Reading prepared remarks. the first lady said she and her lawyers were fighting back against “unfound and baseless lies” that suggested she had ties to Epstein.
“The lies linking me with the disgraceful Jeffrey Epstein need to end today,” Melania Trump said. “The individuals lying about me are devoid of ethical standards, humility and respect. I do not object to their ignorance, but rather I reject their mean-spirited attempts to defame my reputation.”
Wolff’s lawsuit tied the threat of litigation to statements he made to The Daily Beast and in three social media videos. He said some claims were incomplete phrases and were taken out of context. Others, he argued, were protected speech. One example in the lawsuit: the statement that the Trumps were in a “sham marriage. trophy marriage” was a “fair and justified” statement of opinion. The lawsuit also said Wolff never claimed Melania Trump was involved in any of Epstein’s crimes.
Wolff told the court his comments dealt with the first lady’s “involvement” last year managing the matter “behind the scenes” at the White House, not with any claim she was involved in Epstein’s crimes.
Among other points Wolff said were true were comments about Melania Trump meeting Donald Trump in Epstein’s social circle. The lawsuit also cited claims that Donald Trump liked to have sex with his friend’s wives and first slept with Melania Trump on Epstein’s private jet.
The dispute has already produced a correction attempt by a major publication. In July 2025, after receiving a letter from Brito, The Daily Beast retracted an article titled, “Melania Trump ‘Very Involved’ in Epstein Scandal: Author,” based on an interview with Wolff.
While Wolff has published a dozen books. including four bestsellers about the president. the case now ends in Vyskocil’s courtroom for a different reason than the underlying arguments. The judge said the procedural path Wolff sought wasn’t the one federal courts offer. She dismissed his case so the dispute can proceed “like any other. ” keeping the fight alive—just in a different form than Wolff had tried to force.
(Associated Press writer Darlene Superville in Washington contributed.)
Melania Trump Michael Wolff defamation lawsuit Jeffrey Epstein Alejandro Brito Mary Kay Vyskocil First Amendment federal court Daily Beast