A federal judge in Manhattan has dismissed author Michael Wolff’s lawsuit against first lady Melania Trump, rejecting his attempt to use the courts to head off a threatened $1 billion defamation case over remarks he made about her and Jeffrey Epstein.
U.S. District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil, appointed by President Donald Trump, described Wolff’s complaint as showing an “inappropriate level of tactical gamesmanship.” She refused to be “conscripted to oversee an abusively presented spat,” even while recognizing that the parties have a genuine dispute. The court had jurisdiction, she found, but she declined to exercise it. The case was dismissed so the conflict could proceed in the ordinary way.
The fight started after Melania Trump’s lawyer, Alejandro Brito, sent Wolff a demand letter last year. The letter alleged that Wolff’s statements about the first lady and Epstein had caused her “overwhelming reputational and financial harm.” It demanded a retraction, an apology, and damages, and warned that she would otherwise have “no alternative” but to sue for more than $1 billion.
Wolff sued first, filing in New York state court in October. Brito then removed the case to federal court.
In his complaint, Wolff argued that the president and first lady routinely threaten critics with costly litigation “to silence their speech, to intimidate their critics generally, and to extract unjustified payments and North Korean-style confessions and apologies.” He said some of his comments were taken out of context and others were protected opinion, including a characterization of the Trumps’ relationship as a “sham marriage, trophy marriage.” He also maintained that he never accused Melania Trump of criminal conduct connected to Epstein.
Melania Trump has denied any association with Epstein, who died in jail in 2019 while awaiting trial on child sex-trafficking charges. In an April White House statement she said, “The lies linking me with the disgraceful Jeffrey Epstein need to end today.” She added that those spreading the claims “are devoid of ethical standards, humility, and respect” and that she rejected “mean-spirited attempts to defame my reputation.” She said Epstein did not introduce her to Donald Trump and that she met her husband at a New York party in 1998.
A spokesperson said Melania Trump “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.”
The dispute was fueled in part by a Daily Beast article last summer titled “Melania Trump ‘Very Involved’ in Epstein Scandal: Author,” based on an interview with Wolff. After Brito sent a letter, the outlet retracted the piece and apologized. Wolff later said he had been describing the first lady as involved “behind the scenes” in how the White House handled the Epstein matter, not as a participant in Epstein’s crimes.
The legal clash sits against a wider political argument over Epstein files and victims. Republican Rep. Nancy Mace praised Melania Trump for standing with victims and pointed to her advocacy against the distribution of fake intimate images. Democratic Rep. Robert Garcia said he agreed with the first lady’s call for a public hearing and urged House Oversight Chairman James Comer to schedule one. In her April remarks, Melania Trump said Congress should act and allow victims to testify under oath.
Wolff, who has written several books about Donald Trump, has said he wants to put the first couple under oath about Epstein. After the dismissal he indicated he would keep pressing that goal and pursue an appeal. Melania Trump’s lawyers have separately sought sanctions, arguing Wolff raced to court to manufacture publicity and a legal shield before she could file her own case.
The judge did not decide whether Wolff’s statements were defamatory. She only refused to let him skip the normal sequence of litigation. The underlying fight over speech, reputation, and Epstein remains unresolved.
