President Donald Trump filed a $15 billion federal defamation lawsuit against The New York Times on September 15, 2025, targeting the newspaper, four of its reporters, and book publisher Penguin Random House over coverage of his 2024 presidential campaign.
The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, names Times reporters Susanne Craig, Russ Buettner, Peter Baker, and Michael S. Schmidt as defendants. The suit also targets Penguin Random House for publishing a book by Craig and Buettner titled “Lucky Loser: How Donald Trump Squandered His Father’s Fortune and Created the Illusion of Success.”
The complaint alleges the newspaper and defendants published false and defamatory content as part of what the suit describes as a decades-long pattern of intentional defamation against Trump. The filing accuses the defendants of publishing statements negligently, with knowledge of their falsity, or with reckless disregard for their truth or falsity.
According to court documents, the lawsuit specifically references a Times editorial endorsing Democratic opponent Kamala Harris during the 2024 campaign. The suit claims the editorial board asserted without evidence that Trump would defy norms and dismantle American institutions. The filing also points to three long-form articles published last year by the named reporters that challenged narratives about Trump’s business success and analyzed his character.
The suit alleges the newspaper attempted to ruin Trump’s reputation as a businessman, sink his presidential campaign, and prejudice judges and juries against him. The filing characterizes the Times as having become a full-throated mouthpiece for the Democratic Party engaged in industrial-scale defamation against political opponents.
Trump announced the lawsuit on his Truth Social platform, where he accused The New York Times of lying about him and becoming a virtual mouthpiece for what he termed the Radical Left Democrat Party. The president seeks no less than $15 billion in compensatory damages for the alleged defamation, plus unspecified punitive damages.
The New York Times responded with a statement defending its coverage and rejecting the lawsuit’s merit. A spokesperson indicated the lawsuit lacks legitimate legal claims and represents an attempt to stifle independent reporting. The Times stated it would not be deterred by intimidation tactics and would continue pursuing facts while standing up for journalists’ First Amendment rights to ask questions on behalf of the American people.
The lawsuit includes correspondence between Trump’s legal team and both The New York Times and Penguin Random House from October. Trump’s lawyers had demanded that the Times cease making what they characterized as false and defamatory statements about the president. Times newsroom lawyer David McCraw responded by defending the reporting and dismissing most of the letter as personal complaints punctuated with falsehoods.
McCraw wrote that the letter was premised on the troubling notion that anyone reporting unfavorable facts about a presidential candidate was engaged in sabotage rather than contributing to the free exchange of information that makes democracy possible. Carolyn K. Foley, Penguin Random House’s senior vice president and associate general counsel, similarly responded that the authors’ unfavorable view of Trump’s career did not provide a foundation for a defamation claim.
First Amendment scholars and legal experts interviewed by CNN characterized the lawsuit as meritless. Harvard Law School’s Rebecca Tushnet described the 85-page suit as “a statement of contempt for truth, the American public, the judicial process, and everything that deserves our respect in the American tradition.”
Several experts noted that Trump’s legal team faces the burden of proving actual malice, meaning the newspaper published false statements with knowledge of their falsity or reckless disregard for the truth. University of Georgia media law professor Jonathan Peters indicated this represents a very high bar, noting courts consistently protect political reporting and opinion tied to matters of public concern when supported by disclosed facts.
Journalism advocacy organizations characterized the lawsuit as part of Trump’s pattern of weaponized litigation designed to punish publishers that question his narrative. PEN America’s Tim Richardson described the suit as aimed at draining financial resources, instilling fear, and deterring unfavorable coverage.
The lawsuit references Trump’s other pending legal actions against media organizations, including his complaint against The Wall Street Journal and settlements secured from Disney, the parent company of ABC News, and Paramount, the parent company of CBS News. The filing touts these previous actions as evidence of Trump’s broader legal strategy against media outlets.
Legal experts noted the unusual nature of this lawsuit compared to Trump’s previous successful media litigation. Unlike his suits against CBS and ABC, this filing does not cite specific triggering stories or alleged inaccuracies. Fox News media analyst Howard Kurtz characterized it as strange, noting there was no specific inaccuracy alleged, contrasting it with Trump’s successful suits against other networks.
The lawsuit represents Trump’s latest legal action against major news organizations during his second presidential term. Several of the named reporters have previously contributed to MSNBC and NBC News coverage.