President Donald Trump filed a $15 billion defamation lawsuit against The New York Times on Monday, September 16, 2025, targeting the newspaper, four of its reporters, and publisher Penguin Random House over coverage of his 2024 presidential campaign.
The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, which covers the area where Trump resides outside the White House. The suit names reporters Susanne Craig, Russ Buettner, Peter Baker, and Michael Schmidt as defendants, along with Penguin Random House, which published a book by Craig and Buettner titled “Lucky Loser: How Donald Trump Squandered His Father’s Fortune and Created the Illusion of Success.”
The lawsuit alleges that the newspaper attempted to ruin Trump’s business reputation, sink his 2024 campaign, and prejudice judges and juries against him through its coverage. The filing seeks no less than $15 billion in compensatory damages for alleged defamation, as well as unspecified punitive damages.
According to the court documents, the suit claims the articles and book were part of a decades-long pattern by The New York Times of intentional and malicious defamation against Trump. The lawsuit specifically targets three long-form articles published last year by the named reporters that challenged narratives about Trump’s business success, examined past scandals, and analyzed his character.
The suit also singles out a Times editorial endorsing Trump’s Democratic opponent, Kamala Harris, during the 2024 campaign. The filing alleges that the newspaper continued spreading false and defamatory content about Trump and refused to recognize that he secured what the suit describes as the greatest personal and political achievement in American history with his 2024 victory.
In response to the lawsuit, The New York Times issued a statement indicating the suit lacks merit and represents an attempt to stifle independent reporting. The newspaper stated that it will not be deterred by intimidation tactics and will continue pursuing facts without fear or favor while standing up for journalists’ First Amendment rights.
Legal experts and First Amendment scholars who spoke with CNN characterized the lawsuit as meritless. Rebecca Tushnet, the Frank Stanton Professor of the First Amendment at Harvard Law School, described the 85-page suit as “a statement of contempt for truth.”
Several journalism advocacy groups reached similar conclusions about the lawsuit. Tim Richardson of PEN America indicated that the suit was part of Trump’s pattern of seeking to punish publishers that question his narrative in hopes of draining financial resources, instilling fear, and deterring unfavorable coverage.
The lawsuit includes letters Trump’s lawyers sent to The Times and Penguin Random House in October, along with responses from both organizations’ legal representatives. The letter to The Times demanded the newspaper cease making what Trump’s team characterized as false and defamatory statements, listing numerous complaints about Times coverage.
Times newsroom lawyer David McCraw responded by defending the reporting mentioned by Trump’s lawyers. McCraw’s response characterized Trump’s letter as principally a litany of personal complaints punctuated with falsehoods and premised on the troubling notion that reporting unfavorable facts about a presidential candidate constitutes sabotage rather than contributing to democratic discourse.
Carolyn Foley, Penguin Random House’s senior vice president and associate general counsel, responded to Trump’s legal team by indicating that the authors’ unfavorable view of Trump’s career does not provide foundation for a defamation claim.
Legal experts noted that Trump faces a high burden of proof in the case. Jonathan Peters, a media law professor at the University of Georgia, explained that the president and his legal team must prove actual malice, meaning The Times published false statements with knowledge of their falsity or reckless disregard for truth. Peters indicated that the reporting falls within constitutional protections and other privileges, making the suit unlikely to survive early litigation stages.
The lawsuit represents part of Trump’s broader legal campaign against media organizations during his second term. The filing references Trump’s other pending complaint against The Wall Street Journal and highlights settlement payments he secured from Disney, the parent of ABC News, and Paramount, the parent of CBS News. Both Disney and Paramount faced criticism from their own employees for settling rather than defending against Trump’s charges in court.
Clayton Weimers, executive director of Reporters Without Borders’ U.S. branch, indicated that Trump’s latest lawsuit was not surprising given his emboldening by the previous settlements with Paramount and Disney. However, unlike those companies, The Times does not have competing business interests such as theme parks or movie studios.
The Times has a history of prevailing in past lawsuits from Trump and his re-election campaign. Legal experts suggested that while the lawsuit’s merit may be questionable, multi-billion-dollar libel suits are expensive to defend, potentially costing millions in legal fees even if publishers ultimately succeed.
