A federal judge has dismissed a preemptive lawsuit filed by author and journalist Michael Wolff against First Lady Melania Trump, ruling that the case was an improper attempt to secure a legal victory before any defamation lawsuit had even been filed.
In a sharply worded 45-page opinion issued Friday, U.S. District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil rejected Wolff’s request for the court to intervene, describing the filing as a “contorted” legal maneuver that did not belong in federal court. Although she acknowledged there was a genuine dispute between the parties, the judge said Wolff’s approach amounted to an “inappropriate level of tactical gamesmanship.”
“While Plaintiff and the First Lady have a real dispute, they must litigate it according to the same procedures as everyone else,” Vyskocil wrote. “Plaintiff asks for a declaration that, if the First Lady sues him, he deserves to win. That is not how the federal courts work.”
The dispute centers on comments Wolff made linking Melania Trump to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, who died in federal custody in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. Following those remarks, Melania Trump’s attorney, Alejandro Brito, sent Wolff a demand letter demanding that he retract the statements and warning that failure to do so could result in a defamation lawsuit. The letter alleged the comments had caused “overwhelming reputational and financial harm.”
Rather than wait for litigation, Wolff filed suit in New York state court in October, asking the court to declare that his statements were protected speech and to prevent any future defamation claim reportedly valued at up to $1 billion. He also argued that the Trump family has a history of using legal threats to discourage criticism. The case was later moved to federal court.
Judge Vyskocil’s ruling dismisses that preemptive lawsuit without deciding whether Wolff’s statements were defamatory, meaning the underlying legal dispute remains unresolved and could still proceed if Melania Trump chooses to file a separate defamation action.
A spokesperson for the first lady welcomed the decision, saying Melania Trump “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.”
Earlier this year, during an April White House press conference, Melania Trump publicly denied the allegations, stating, “The lies linking me with the disgraceful Jeffrey Epstein need to end today.” She said she had no friendship or involvement with Epstein or his associate Ghislaine Maxwell, adding that she never visited Epstein’s private island, never flew on his aircraft, and had no knowledge of his criminal activities. She also emphasized that she met Donald Trump independently at a New York event in 1998 and condemned what she described as attempts to damage her reputation with false claims.
For his part, Wolff has maintained that he never accused the first lady of criminal conduct involving Epstein. He argues that some of his remarks concerned her role behind the scenes in handling White House matters related to the Epstein controversy. Following legal objections from Brito, The Daily Beast retracted an article based on an interview with Wolff.
The controversy also drew reactions from lawmakers across party lines. Republican Rep. Nancy Mace praised Melania Trump for supporting Epstein victims and for her advocacy against deepfake intimate images, while Democratic Rep. Robert Garcia backed her call for congressional hearings that would allow victims to testify under oath.
Friday’s dismissal does not determine who is ultimately right in the dispute. Instead, it makes clear that any defamation claims must be litigated through the normal legal process, leaving open the possibility of future proceedings, potentially in another jurisdiction such as Florida.
