NEW YORK (AP) — A Manhattan federal judge dismissed author Michael Wolff’s legal case against first lady Melania Trump on Friday, describing his “twisted” effort to stop her potential $1 billion lawsuit over his comments linking her to Jeffrey Epstein as contrary to how “federal courts operate.”
Federal Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil criticized both parties for engaging in an “unacceptable degree of strategic maneuvering” and declared she “refuses to supervise a poorly presented quarrel.”
Vyskocil, a President Donald Trump appointee, acknowledged that Wolff and the first lady “face a legitimate legal conflict,” but emphasized “their dispute must follow standard legal processes like any other case.”
The author initiated legal proceedings against Melania Trump in October following correspondence from her attorney, Alejandro Brito, warning that she would have “no choice” but to pursue litigation unless he withdrew comments that allegedly inflicted “severe damage to her reputation and finances.”
Initially filed in New York state court, Brito successfully moved the case to federal jurisdiction. In her 45-page ruling, Vyskocil determined that although federal court maintains authority over the matter, she chose not to exercise it and “dismisses this case to be litigated like any other.”
Attempts to reach representatives for the first lady’s office, Brito, and Wolff’s legal counsel were unsuccessful.
During an April White House appearance, Melania Trump publicly rejected any connection to Epstein, the wealthy financier and registered sex offender who died by suicide in jail during August 2019 while facing sex trafficking allegations.
Speaking from prepared text, the first lady announced she and her legal team were challenging “false and groundless accusations” suggesting connections to Epstein.
“The lies linking me with the disgraceful Jeffrey Epstein need to end today,” Melania Trump said. “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’s legal filing claimed the Trumps “routinely threaten critics” with expensive litigation “to suppress opposition speech, intimidate detractors broadly, and secure unwarranted financial settlements and North Korean style confessions and apologies.”
He alleged these intimidation tactics were “intended to establish nationwide fear preventing citizens from freely exercising First Amendment protections.”
The author has written twelve books, including four bestselling works focused on the president.
According to his lawsuit, Melania Trump’s legal threats concerned remarks he made to The Daily Beast and in three online videos. Wolff argued some statements were partial quotes removed from proper context.
Additional comments, his legal team argued, constituted protected expression. The characterization of the Trumps’ relationship as a “sham marriage, trophy marriage” represented a “reasonable and warranted” opinion, according to the filing.
The lawsuit emphasized that Wolff never alleged Melania Trump participated in Epstein’s criminal activities.
Following Brito’s correspondence in July 2025, The Daily Beast withdrew an article headlined “Melania Trump ‘Very Involved’ in Epstein Scandal: Author,” which featured Wolff’s interview.
Wolff’s lawsuit clarified his remarks addressed the first lady’s “participation” in managing the situation “privately” within the White House — not suggesting involvement in Epstein’s offenses.
Other statements Wolff defended as accurate included claims about Melania Trump encountering Donald Trump within Epstein’s social network, and allegations that Donald Trump pursued relationships with associates’ spouses and initially became intimate with Melania Trump aboard Epstein’s aircraft.
