Trump Directed to Cover Nearly $400K in Legal Fees for Lawsuit Against The New York Times and Reporters

Background of the Case

A Manhattan judge has ordered former President Donald Trump to pay The New York Times and three of its investigative writers almost nearly $400K in legal fees in the latest legal war. Judge Robert Reed rejected Trump’s second lawsuit against the newspaper and its identified reporters in 2023, but this ruling came after that complaint was filed in 2021.

The case was based on several investigative pieces that the New York Times published in 2018. In essence, a number of Donald Trump’s private tax returns were made public by journalists Susanne Craig, David Barstow, and Russell Buettner after they looked into his riches and tax tactics, which he disregarded.

Their stories revealed how Trump had received at least $413 million from Fred Trump, his father over these decades, and how they used different tax avoidance schemes to minimize their taxes.

Articles, which were based on secret tax documents and received the Pulitzer Prize, refuted Trump’s self-made wealth claim by exposing a sequence of strategies to avoid taxes related.

The Allegations and the Lawsuit

In his lawsuit, Trump charged that The New York Times and its journalists had secretly made a deal with his estranged niece – Mary Trump to obtain and reveal his private tax documents. Claiming that Mary Trump had broken the terms of a settlement agreement by giving these records to the journalists, he demanded $100 million in damages.

However, Judge Robert Reed dismissed the case against The New York Times and its reporters in May 2023. Significantly, Reed’s decision upheld the journalists’ protections under the First Amendment, the part of the constitution that guarantees free speech.

The Judge’s Ruling and Legal Implications

In a later order, Judge Reed held that $392,638.69 was a reasonable amount for legal services because of the complicated nature of this case and most importantly due to professionalism lucrative in lawyers.

The New York Times has praised this verdict as an important win for freedom of speech. A newspaper spokesperson said, “Today’s decision shows that the state’s newly amended anti-SLAPP statute can be a powerful force for protecting press freedom.” The speaker also stated that such ruling sends an imperative message to anybody abusing the judicial system as a means of silencing journalists.

Although Trump’s attorney – Alina Habba did not immediately respond to the judge’s order, she had previously posited that the court should punish journalists such as those from The New York Times for civil offenses.

Habba stated that the reporters involved here violated limits of methods used for news gathering as protected by the First Amendment.

The Continuing Legal Battle

While the lawsuit against Trump and The New York Times is over, the part against Mary Trump is still pending. Trump claims that by giving the reporters access to private tax documents, Mary Trump violated the terms of a previous settlement deal. Mary Trump recently asked to put the lawsuit on hold while she challenges the ruling that permitted the claim against her to proceed, but Judge Reed dismissed her request. 

The media and legal experts are keeping a close eye on this protracted court drama as it continues to examine the limits of press freedom and legal accountability.