Trump files $15 billion defamation suit against New York Times, Penguin Random House
Win McNamee/Getty Images
(NEW YORK) — President Donald Trump is seeking $15 billion in damages from The New York Times and Penguin Random House in a defamation lawsuit that alleges the newspaper and publisher engaged in a campaign to damage his reputation ahead of the 2024 election.
Alleging that the Times has become a “leading, and unapologetic, purveyor of falsehoods,” Trump’s attorneys argued that a series of articles about Trump — including a report that Trump’s former chief of staff John Kelly warned the president would rule like a dictator, an article about the making of “The Apprentice,” and a report about the controversy that has followed Trump — amounted to libel.
Filed in the Middle District of Florida, the lawsuit names The New York Times and Times reporters Peter Baker, Russ Buettner, Susanne Craig, and Michael Schmidt as defendants. The lawsuit also names Penguin Random House — the publisher of Craig and Buettner’s book “Lucky Loser: How Donald Trump Squandered His Father’s Fortune and Created the Illusion of Success” — as a defendant.
“Today, the Times is a fullthroated mouthpiece of the Democrat Party. The newspaper’s editorial routine is now one of industrial-scale defamation and libel against political opponents,” the lawsuit claimed.
Trump’s lawyers allege that The New York Times and Penguin Random House sought to not only damage the president’s “hard-earned and world-renowned reputation for business success,” but also hurt his chances of winning the 2024 election.
“President Trump brings this suit to highlight that principle and to clearly state to all Americans exhausted by, and furious at, the decades of journalistic corruption, that the era of unchecked, deliberate defamation by the Times and other legacy media outlets is over,” the lawsuit said.
A New York Times spokesperson said the lawsuit has no merit.
“It lacks any legitimate legal claims and instead is an attempt to stifle and discourage independent reporting,” the Times spokesperson said. “The New York Times will not be deterred by intimidation tactics. We will continue to pursue the facts without fear or favor and stand up for journalists’ First Amendment right to ask questions on behalf of the American people.”
Penguin Random House did not immediately respond to a request for comment from ABC News.
“President Trump’s transcendent ability to defy wrongful conventions has been vividly reflected in his successful undertaking to restore integrity to journalism, and repair the immense damage caused by legacy media outlets such as the Times for the better part of a decade,” the lawsuit said.
In July, Trump filed a $10 billion lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal after the Journal reported that Trump allegedly sent disgraced financier Jeffery Epstein a bawdy letter in 2003 that was included in a book made for Epstein’s 50th birthday, which Trump has denied.
In response to that suit, a spokesperson for Journal owner Dow Jones said, “We have full confidence in the rigor and accuracy of our reporting, and will vigorously defend against any lawsuit.”
(WASHINGTON) — Attorneys for a fired DOJ official-turned-whistleblower released a series of emails and texts Thursday that they say bolster claims that Emil Bove — a top Trump appointee to the Justice Department now in line for a powerful judicial appointment — repeatedly suggested defying orders from courts to enforce the administration’s immigration policies.
The messages, from former immigration attorney Erez Reuveni, provide a real-time look at the internal scramble among top Justice Department and other administration officials as they sought to defend the legality of several rushed deportation efforts that have since become the subject of high-stakes legal challenges.
According to lawyers for Reuveni and Senate Democrats who released the messages, they also provide clear support for Reuveni’s initial whistleblower disclosure, which came just a day before Bove was set to appear for his confirmation hearing for a seat on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
According to the complaint, Reuveni said that in a March 14 meeting on the eve of the administration carrying out its initial wave of deportations under the Alien Enemies Act, Bove remarked that DOJ “would need to consider telling the courts “f— you” in response to any order that sought to enjoin the removals.
In a series of texts released by Reuveni from March 15 — the day that U.S. District judge James Boasberg ordered the administration to turn around two planes carrying migrants deported under the AEA before they arrived in El Salvador, Reuveni said, “This doesn’t end with anything but a nationwide injunction” before adding, “And a decision point on f— you.”
“It’s a question if drew gets out without a sanction,” another attorney replied, an apparent reference to Drew Ensign, a career DOJ official who was tasked with defending the administration’s AEA deportations in the Boasberg case.
Later in the evening, Reuveni again texted, “guess its find out time on the f— you,” an apparent reference, again, to Bove’s alleged remark.
While it’s unclear what impact the texts could have on Bove’s nomination, they could ultimately serve to provide Judge Boasberg with evidence to carry out his contempt proceedings against the Trump administration, which are currently on hold by a D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals panel.
The texts also provide insight into the Justice Department’s initial deliberations regarding the administration’s resistance to returning Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who was deported in March to El Salvador’s CECOT mega-prison — despite a 2019 court order barring his deportation to that country due to fear of persecution — after the Trump administration claimed he was a member of the criminal gang MS-13, which his family and attorneys deny.
In one email, Reuveni argued that by defying an order to bring Abrego Garcia back from El Salvador, the administration risked “making very bad law here that jeopardizes many far more important initiatives of the current administration over one person.”
The messages also suggest that before Abrego Garcia’s case became the subject of nationwide attention, officials from the State Department and DHS appeared more than willing to facilitate his return — a sharp contrast to remarks from officials like Stephen Miller, who has repeatedly questioned Abrego Garcia’s character and labeled him a “terrorist.”
“I agree he should be brough back to the US if El Sal will release him back to us, and we should take steps to help ensure his safety in the meantime,” one State Department official said in an email.
“I’m with Erez, we want to make sure everyone knows this gentleman is alright if it takes us time to get el sal to send him back,” a DHS lawyer replied.
During his confirmation hearing, Bove vigorously disputed Reuveni’s whistleblower complaint and denied he ever instructed department officials to defy court orders. When pressed, however, on whether he ever made the remark about potentially having to tell the courts, ‘f— you,’ Bove responded he could not recall making such a statement.
In a statement Thursday responding to Reuveni’s release of the messages, Attorney General Pam Bondi described him as “a leaker asserting false claims seeking five minutes of fame” in order to sink Bove’s nomination.
“As Mr. Bove testified and as the Department has made clear, there was no court order to defy, as we successfully argued to the DC Circuit when seeking a stay, when they stayed Judge Boasberg’s lawless order,” Bondi said. “And no one was ever asked to defy a court order. This is another instance of misinformation being spread to serve a narrative that does not align with the facts.”
Martin County Sheriff’s Office/Handout/Anadolu via Getty Images
(FORT PIERCE, Fla.) — Jurors in the criminal trial of the man accused of trying to assassinate Donald Trump on his golf course last year are set to hear testimony Friday from five law enforcement witnesses, concluding a chaotic start to the case that could send the alleged assassin to prison for the rest of his life.
While prosecutors originally estimated needing about three weeks to conclude their case against 59-year-old Ryan Routh, they signaled on Thursday that their case might conclude sooner than planned because of the quick pace of the first few witnesses’ testimony.
Routh, who is representing himself despite not being a lawyer or having any legal training, has not yet objected to any of the questions posed by prosecutors during the direct examination of witnesses, and his cross-examinations have been usually short.
“I’m very simple-minded, yes,” Routh told U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon Thursday when she inquired about his plans to cross-examine future witnesses.
Routh has been rebuked several times by Cannon after making unexpected and off-topic comments. During opening statements Thursday, Routh launched into a speech about the origin of the human species, global conflicts, and his political grievances, before the judge cut him off after about six minutes for making arguments that she said have “absolutely nothing to do with the evidence in this case.”
Jurors at the trial in Fort Pierce, Florida, heard Thursday from the Secret Service agent who confronted an armed Routh on the golf course before Routh fled, and a witness who identified Routh to police.
Prosecutors allege that Routh put together a methodical plan — including purchasing a military-grade weapon, researching Trump’s movements, and utilizing a dozen burner phones — to kill Trump based on political grievances.
Hiding in the bushes of Trump’s Palm Beach golf course and armed with a rifle, Routh allegedly came within a few hundred yards of the then-presidential nominee before a Secret Service agent spotted his rifle poking out of the tree line.
Routh allegedly fled the scene but was later arrested by a local sheriff’s office on a nearby interstate.
He faces five criminal charges, including attempted assassination of a major presidential candidate, using a firearm in furtherance of a crime, assaulting a federal officer, possessing a firearm as a felon, and using a gun with a defaced serial number.
(WASHINGTON) — After the Supreme Court cleared the way for the Trump administration to enforce its ban on transgender service members, Master Sgt. Logan Ireland, who has served in the Air Force for 15 years, was faced with the options of separating from the military voluntarily or being processed for involuntary separation – a prospect that comes with losing half of his separation pay.
When Logan was presented with the option of applying for early retirement at 15 years, he applied and was relieved when the Air Force approved his request and gave him an early retirement date of Dec. 1, 2025.
“It’s kind of like your golden ticket. So I felt solid,” Ireland told ABC News.
But on Monday, Ireland said he received a memo from Brian Scarlett, who is performing the duties of the assistant secretary of the Air Force for manpower and reserve affairs, indicating that early retirement at 15-18 years for transgender service members would be denied.
“After careful consideration of the individual applications, I am disapproving all Temporary Early Retirement Authority (TERA) exception to policy requests in Tabs 1 and 2 for members with 15-18 years of service,” the memo said, adding that those denied early retirement would need to be processed for separation instead.
Military service members are eligible for full retirement benefits after they complete 20 years of service. Anything less than that requires an approved exemption. Air Force personnel who had 18 but less than 20 years of service were approved for early retirement because they were close to the 20 years, while several dozen senior Airmen who had between 15 and 18 years of service also sought approval for this early retirement, the Air Force said. Early retirement would allow them to receive part of their pension.
The memo, which was reviewed by ABC News, includes a “script” for commanders to communicate with applicants regarding TERA denial and separation, and explains that the Department of the Air Force (DAF) “prematurely notified some DAF members that their TERA applications under the gender dysphoria provision had been approved.”
The Air Force said in a statement to ABC News, “Approximately a dozen service members between 15 and 18 years of service were prematurely notified that their TERA applications under the gender dysphoria provision had been approved, but higher level review was required under the DoD gender dysphoria policy for those members.”
Ireland, who has served multiple overseas tours to countries like Afghanistan, the United Arab Emirates and South Korea, said that the reversal was a “betrayal.”
“The first feeling I felt was betrayal. I’ve given my life to the service,” he said.
“I was promised this. I had my retirement orders in hand,” he added. “I’ve been starting to process what life looks like outside of uniform, and now we don’t know what that looks like.”
According to the Scarlett memo, transgender service members who choose to voluntarily separate will receive separation pay at twice the rate of those who choose involuntary separation.
The memo from Scarlett also says that while service members like Ireland would not be eligible for early retirement, they will still be “entitled to an honorable discharge characterization, separation benefits and transition assistance.”
Air Force Cmdr. Emily Shilling, who is the president of Sparta Pride — an organization advocating for about 2,400 transgender people in the military and those who hope to join — criticized the move in a phone interview with ABC News on Thursday, saying that the Air Force “reneged on their promise.”
Shilling said that some applications for early retirement had already been approved, but now the lives of those service members who have dedicated close to two decades of service to their country have been upended again.
Shilling, who will be eligible for retirement at 20 years in September, previously told ABC News that she chose to self-identify as transgender and begin the process of voluntarily separating from the military, but said that she made the decision “under duress.”
“I was coerced into it because we knew that the voluntary separation would give me an honorable discharge with some portion of my retirement, and I’d be able to keep all of my benefits,” Shilling said. ABC News reached out to the Air Force but a request for comment was not returned.
The Department of Defense offered transgender service members the opportunity to voluntarily separate before they were forced out through involuntary separations. Incentives were offered for voluntary separations that amounted to double the benefits that they might have received if they were involuntarily separated.
Shilling and Ireland both decided to fight the ban in federal court, each becoming lead plaintiffs in separate federal lawsuits – Shilling vs. Trump and Ireland vs. Hegseth. A third lawsuit, Talbott vs. Trump, also challenges the ban, which was announced in a Jan. 27 executive order by President Donald Trump, who directed the Defense Department to revise the policy allowing transgender troops to openly serve.
“Expressing a false ‘gender identity’ divergent from an individual’s sex cannot satisfy the rigorous standards necessary for military service,” the Trump order said, arguing that receiving gender-affirming medical care is one of the conditions that is physically and mentally “incompatible with active duty.”
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth echoed this sentiment in a Feb. 7 memo, saying that “efforts to split our troops along lines of identity weaken our Force and make us vulnerable.”
Professor Nathaniel Frank, a cultural historian and researcher at Cornell University who studies the history of LGBTQ+ people in the military, told ABC News that decades of research dispute the administration’s arguments that transgender individuals are not fit to serve.
“There’s never been any evidence found that gay or transgender service members present any problems to unit cohesion or readiness, and that the evidence finds the opposite, that the prohibitions against trans people are what harm readiness and cohesion because they undermine trust,” Frank said.
Despite the legal challenges, the Supreme Court ruled in May that the administration can enforce the ban as the lawsuits move forward.
In response to the letter denying his early retirement, Ireland signed a memo on Wednesday indicating that he understands that his TERA exception to policy application was denied.
The memo, which was reviewed by ABC News, included a box in which Ireland was asked to indicate whether he does or does not intend to submit a voluntary separation request.
Ireland checked the box that says, “I do not,” electing involuntary separation instead.
“One thing the military failed to teach me was how to retreat,” Ireland told ABC News. “I’m not going down without a fight.”
ABC News’ Luis Martinez contributed to this report.
