Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil, an appointee of President Donald Trump, issued the dismissal in Manhattan federal court, saying the case represented “an inappropriate level of tactical gamesmanship.” Despite declining to oversee what she called “an abusively presented spat,” Vyskocil acknowledged that both sides have a “real dispute.”
Melania Trump had her lawyer issue Michael Wolff a cease-and-desist letter last year demanding he delete statements he made linking her to Jeffrey Epstein and threatening legal action if he refused. Wolff, in response, filed suit against Trump in state court in October, seeking to block her from suing him for $1 billion over what he claimed were defamatory remarks.
Alejandro Brito, Trump’s lawyer, moved the complaint to federal court. Vyskocil ruled that while federal court had jurisdiction over the case, she was declining to exercise it and would “dismiss this case to be litigated like any other.”
A Melania Trump spokesperson responded to the ruling, saying 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.” Trump’s legal team had previously stated that Wolff’s statements caused her “overwhelming reputational and financial harm.”
The 56-year-old first lady has denied any association with Epstein, who died in jail in 2019 while awaiting trial on charges of child sex trafficking. “The lies linking me with the disgraceful Jeffrey Epstein need to end today,” Melania Trump said in an April press conference. “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 contended in his lawsuit that the president and first lady “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.” He argued that some of his statements were taken out of context and others constituted protected speech, including his characterization of the Trumps’ marriage as a “sham marriage, trophy marriage,” which he labeled a “fair and justified” opinion in the filing.
Wolff also contended in his lawsuit that he never accused Melania Trump of being involved with criminal activity associated with Epstein. The Daily Beast retracted an article last summer titled “Melania Trump ‘Very Involved’ in Epstein Scandal: Author,” which was based on an interview with Wolff, after the outlet received a letter from Brito. In the original interview, Wolff said he reported that the first lady was “behind the scenes” dealing with the situation at the White House, but was not involved criminally.
Congressional figures responded to Melania Trump‘s statement. Republican Rep. Nancy Mace praised her, saying “Melania Trump stands with Epstein victims,” citing the first lady’s advocacy for legislation addressing the distribution of fake intimate images and stating “The truth will prevail.”
Democratic Rep. Robert Garcia called for a public hearing, writing “We agree with First Lady Melania Trump’s call for a public hearing. We encourage Chairman Comer to schedule a hearing immediately.” Garcia said the remarks renewed attention on the broader investigation into the matter.
The judge’s dismissal clears the way for Melania Trump‘s anticipated $1 billion defamation action to proceed in state court without the complication of Wolff’s federal lawsuit blocking it. The ruling signals that courts will not serve as a shield for those seeking to prevent defamation claims through preemptive legal action, particularly when presented in what judges view as tactical maneuvers rather than legitimate legal disputes.
