NEW YORK — A federal judge in Manhattan has dismissed an unusual preemptive lawsuit brought by author and journalist Michael Wolff against First Lady Melania Trump, sharply rebuking the action as an improper legal maneuver.
U.S. District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil declined to entertain Wolff’s complaint, which sought a declaratory judgment barring the first lady from pursuing a threatened $1 billion defamation claim against him. Wolff had filed the action after the first lady’s legal team demanded he retract public remarks linking her to disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein.
In a pointed ruling, Judge Vyskocil characterized Wolff’s preemptive filing as a “contorted” legal gambit that amounted to “an inappropriate level of tactical gamesmanship.” While acknowledging the parties share a genuine underlying dispute, Vyskocil made clear that the court would not serve as an arena for premature posturing.
“This is not how federal courts work,” Vyskocil wrote, adding that she refused to be “drafted to oversee an abusively presented spat” and dismissed the matter so it could proceed through traditional legal channels should a formal defamation action be filed.
Escalating Retraction Demands
The dispute traces back to a formal demand letter sent last year by Melania Trump’s attorney, Alejandro Brito. The letter warned Wolff that the first lady would have “no alternative” but to file a $1 billion lawsuit unless he retracted public claims suggesting she had ties to Epstein, who died in federal custody in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges.
In response, Wolff initially filed suit in New York state court last October to preemptively neutralize the threat. Brito subsequently had the case removed to federal jurisdiction, where Vyskocil chose to decline discretionary authority under the Declaratory Judgment Act.
Following the dismissal, a spokesperson for the first lady reaffirmed her intent to contest the allegations, stating she “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.” Melania Trump had previously condemned the claims at an April press conference, stating that efforts to connect her with Epstein were “devoid of ethical standards” and constituted a deliberate attempt to tarnish her public standing.
Free Speech Claims and Retractions
Wolff had argued in his complaint that the Trumps routinely use aggressive legal ultimatums to intimidate critics and extract concessions. His complaint asserted that his public commentary—including characterizations of the Trumps’ marriage—constituted constitutionally protected opinion and that he never accused the first lady of criminal conduct.
The dispute previously prompted The Daily Beast to retract a headline claiming the first lady was “very involved” in the Epstein scandal following legal pressure from Brito. Wolff clarified that his commentary only referenced behind-the-scenes discussions and did not allege personal wrongdoing.
With the preemptive action dismissed, the path is cleared for the first lady’s legal counsel to decide whether to bring a direct defamation action against the author.
