Michael Wolff Lawsuit Author Sues Melania Trump First—Here’s Why He Can Question Her and Trump Under Oath
Author Michael Wolff filed an anti-SLAPP lawsuit against First Lady Melania Trump in New York State Supreme Court on October 21, 2025, after her attorneys threatened him with a $1 billion defamation suit over statements linking her to Jeffrey Epstein. The preemptive legal action seeks declaratory judgment, compensatory and punitive damages, and—critically—subpoena power to depose both Melania and President Donald Trump under oath about their Epstein connections. As of December 2025, Wolff is struggling to serve papers as the First Lady reportedly evades service.
What the Michael Wolff Lawsuit Is About
This isn’t a standard defamation case. Michael Wolff sued Melania Trump before she could sue him—a calculated legal maneuver that flipped the script entirely.
On October 15, 2025, Melania Trump’s attorney Alejandro Brito sent Wolff a threat letter. The letter demanded Wolff “immediately issue an apology for the false, defamatory, disparaging, misleading, and inflammatory statements about Mrs. Trump.” It demanded monetary compensation for “overwhelming reputational” damage. The letter gave Wolff until October 21, 2025 at 5:00 PM EST to comply—or face legal action seeking “over $1 billion in damages.”
Wolff didn’t apologize. He didn’t retract. Instead, on October 21—the deadline day—he filed his own lawsuit against the First Lady in Manhattan Supreme Court.
The legal strategy is straightforward: by suing first under New York’s Anti-SLAPP law, Wolff forces Melania Trump to prove her defamation claims have merit. And crucially, he gains subpoena power—the ability to demand both Trumps appear for depositions and answer questions under oath about Jeffrey Epstein.
“To be perfectly honest, I’d like nothing better than to get Donald Trump and Melania Trump under oath in front of a court reporter, and actually find out all of the details of their relationship with Epstein,” Wolff said in an Instagram video after filing.
This marks the first time a sitting First Lady has been sued as defendant in a civil case. It appears to be the first time any president’s wife has faced such legal action.
The Statements That Started Everything
Melania Trump’s attorneys identified 11 specific statements they claim are defamatory. These appeared in The Daily Beast articles, Wolff’s podcast “Inside Trump’s Head,” and his social media posts.
The most explosive allegation: Wolff stated that Jeffrey Epstein told him Melania first slept with Donald Trump on Epstein’s private jet—the infamous “Lolita Express.”
Other contested statements include:
- Melania Trump was “very involved” in Epstein’s social circle
- The Trumps’ marriage is a “sham”
- Melania is “actively managing” the White House response to Epstein controversies
- Epstein introduced Melania to Donald Trump
- Trump liked to sleep with his wife’s friends, according to Epstein
- The couple met at an Epstein-connected party
In July 2025, The Daily Beast published an article headlined “Melania Trump ‘Very Involved’ in Epstein Scandal: Author” based on Wolff’s podcast appearance. After receiving Melania’s complaint, The Daily Beast retracted the article and issued an apology: “Upon reflection, we have determined that the article did not meet our standards and has therefore been removed from our platforms.”
The publication also removed portions of the podcast episode referencing the First Lady. In their apology, they wrote: “The First Lady points to her best-selling book Melania as the definitive account of her life story. We apologize to the First Lady and our readers.”
But Wolff refused to follow suit. Similar to how journalists in other high-profile defamation cases have fought back against intimidation tactics, Wolff chose to stand his ground.
What Anti-SLAPP Laws Do
SLAPP stands for “Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation.” These are lawsuits designed not to win on the merits, but to intimidate critics through expensive legal fees and the threat of massive damages.
New York enacted anti-SLAPP statutes specifically to protect journalists, authors, and citizens from being silenced by powerful people weaponizing defamation law.
Under New York’s anti-SLAPP law, Wolff can file a declaratory judgment action. The law requires the person making defamation threats to prove their claims have “substantial basis in law and fact.” If they can’t, they pay the speaker’s legal fees plus compensatory and punitive damages.
Wolff’s lawsuit states: “A SLAPP action is defined as a lawsuit intended to suppress and intimidate speech on an ‘issue of public interest.’ Where the action ‘lacks a substantial basis in fact or law’ fees and other damages will be awarded to the speaker.”
By filing first, Wolff controls the jurisdiction (New York), the timing, and—most importantly—the discovery process. He gets to issue subpoenas. He gets to ask questions. He gets to demand documents.
The lawsuit explicitly states Wolff “intends to exercise [subpoena power] fully and expeditiously” and will call “numerous witnesses, most of them in New York.”
Wolff’s Legal Defense: Opinion vs. Fact
Wolff’s complaint argues his statements fall into protected categories under First Amendment law.
Context Defense: Many statements were taken out of context or were not authored by him but by headline writers at The Daily Beast.
Opinion Defense: Statements like calling the Trump marriage a “sham” constitute protected opinion, not factual assertions that can be proven true or false.
Truth Defense: For factual statements—like saying Melania was part of Epstein’s social circle or is managing White House response to the controversy—Wolff argues these are either true or backed by evidence.
Public Figure Standard: Melania Trump is a public figure. Under New York Times v. Sullivan, public figures must prove “actual malice”—that Wolff knew statements were false or acted with reckless disregard for truth. This is an extremely high bar.
The lawsuit states: “It is not defamatory to say that Mrs. Trump is actively managing the present White House response to the controversy. Nor is it defamatory to say that Mrs. Trump was involved in Epstein’s rather expansive social circle.”
Wolff also argues he’s done precisely what journalists should do: “Mr. Wolff is a journalist who has done his job diligently, reporting what he knows; identifying what he does not know; and asking important questions that deserve inquiry.”
The Epstein Connection Wolff Claims
Michael Wolff isn’t speculating. He claims to have conducted approximately 100 hours of interviews with Jeffrey Epstein between 2017 and 2019, before Epstein’s death in his Manhattan jail cell.
Wolff interviewed Epstein while researching his 2018 book “Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House.” Epstein apparently wanted Wolff to write his biography.
In November 2024, Wolff released audio recordings from those interviews where Epstein discussed his relationship with Trump. According to Wolff’s account, Epstein described being “involved in every aspect of each other’s lives, social lives, sexual lives, business lives” during their decade-long friendship before falling out around 2004 over a real estate dispute.
Wolff says their conversations revealed “the real closeness, the intimacy” between Trump and Epstein.
Congressional emails released in November 2025 showed Wolff actually advised Epstein about Trump matters—suggesting a working relationship between the journalist and convicted sex offender that goes deeper than typical source relationships.
Wolff’s forthcoming book—tentatively titled “The Art of Her Deal: The Untold Story of Melania Trump (Redux)”—reportedly explores Melania’s role in Epstein matters and her involvement in the Trump administration’s refusal to release Epstein’s files.
Current Status: Melania Trump Evading Service
As of December 18, 2025, Wolff is struggling to serve legal papers on the First Lady.
On his December 18 podcast episode, Wolff detailed his frustrations. He first tried serving papers through Melania’s attorney. “He said, ‘Please direct all your communications to Melania Trump through this office, through me.’ So, OK, great. We went to his office to serve him, and he said, ‘No, I’m not accepting service,'” Wolff explained.
Next, Wolff hired a professional process server to deliver papers to Trump Tower. “They took the service and then, after they accepted this—somewhere midway in this—we got a call and they were saying, ‘Hey, you’re trying to serve the first lady. We’re not doing that.’ They’re like, ‘No way are we serving the first lady of the United States.'”
Wolff expects to exhaust all service options and then ask the court to proceed without traditional service. “I expect Melania to be served by the end of this week, once I tell the court that I have exhausted my options,” he said.
The White House and Melania’s attorney have not responded to multiple requests for comment from journalists.
In a statement through her spokesperson, Melania said: “First lady Melania Trump is proud to continue standing up to those who spread malicious and defamatory falsehoods as they desperately try to get undeserved attention and money from their unlawful conduct.”
What Laws Apply to This Case
Several legal frameworks govern this dispute:
New York Anti-SLAPP Law (Civil Rights Law § 70-a, 76-a): Protects speakers from lawsuits designed to chill speech on matters of public interest. Requires plaintiffs to show substantial basis for their claims or face paying defendant’s fees and damages.
First Amendment Protection: Federal constitutional protections for free speech apply. Government officials and their families can’t use defamation law to silence criticism without meeting high standards.
Defamation Law – Public Figure Standard: Under New York Times v. Sullivan (1964), public figures must prove actual malice—knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for truth. Melania Trump, as First Lady, is a public figure subject to this heightened standard.
Declaratory Judgment (NY CPLR 3001): Allows Wolff to seek court declaration that his statements are not defamatory, providing protection against the threatened $1 billion suit hanging over his head.
Discovery Rules (NY CPLR 3101): If the case proceeds, both sides can demand documents, take depositions, and issue subpoenas. This is what Wolff is after—the power to compel testimony under oath.
Similar Cases: How Courts Have Ruled
Several precedents inform how this case might proceed:
Trump v. O’Brien (2009): Donald Trump sued author Timothy O’Brien for defamation over statements in “TrumpNation: The Art of Being The Donald.” New Jersey appellate court dismissed the case, finding Trump failed to prove actual malice. The court noted Trump is a public figure subject to robust criticism.
Stormy Daniels Litigation (2018-2019): Trump sued adult film actress Stormy Daniels and her attorney Michael Avenatti. Courts dismissed Trump’s claims and ordered him to pay Daniels’ legal fees, finding his lawsuits were meant to chill speech.
Carol Lawsuit Threats: Trump repeatedly threatened to sue writer E. Jean Carroll for defamation. When he finally did, he lost—twice. Courts awarded Carroll $88.3 million total after finding Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation.
Alex Jones Sandy Hook Cases (2022): Courts awarded nearly $1 billion in damages against conspiracy theorist Alex Jones for defaming Sandy Hook families. However, Jones’ statements were provably false factual assertions—very different from Wolff’s reporting based on source interviews.
The pattern: Courts disfavor defamation suits brought by public figures to silence criticism, especially when plaintiffs can’t prove actual malice.
What Wolff Wants from the Lawsuit
Wolff’s complaint seeks three primary outcomes:
Declaratory Judgment: Court declaration that his statements are either not defamatory or are protected speech. This shields him from Melania’s $1 billion threat.
Compensatory and Punitive Damages: Money compensation for harm caused by Melania’s intimidation tactics, plus punitive damages to deter future SLAPP suits.
Subpoena Power and Depositions: Authority to compel testimony from Melania Trump, Donald Trump, and others with knowledge of the Trump-Epstein relationship. This is the real prize.
“This lawsuit is an opportunity to reconstruct their lives together,” Wolff told his podcast co-host Joanna Coles. “This is precisely what Donald Trump wants covered up.”
Wolff wants to ask about:
- How and when Melania met Donald Trump
- Their connections to Jeffrey Epstein’s social circle
- What they knew about Epstein’s activities
- Their involvement in suppressing Epstein file releases
- The nature of their marriage and relationship
“Everybody who was involved in that circle during that time period is someone who we’ll certainly think about calling,” Wolff said.
The Trump Administration’s Epstein Problem
Context matters. This lawsuit emerges from broader frustration about suppressed Epstein files.
During his 2024 campaign, Donald Trump repeatedly promised to release Epstein’s client files and records. In July 2025, the Justice Department announced it had reviewed the case, determined no additional people would be charged, and would not release further information.
This sparked bipartisan outrage. Even Trump’s allies demanded transparency. Yet the Trump administration has stonewalled. No files have been released.
Wolff argues in his lawsuit: “These threatened legal actions are designed to create a climate of fear in the nation so that people cannot freely or confidently exercise their 1st Amendment rights. The threats are also intended to shut down legitimate inquiry into the Epstein matter which the Trumps and their collaborators have at every turn sought to impede and suppress.”
The filing accuses the Trumps and their “MAGA myrmidons” of using legal threats to “intimidate their critics,” “extract unjustified payments,” and get “North Korean style confessions and apologies.”
“This has just become their trick in the book,” Wolff said on his podcast. “We don’t want this discussion to go on. How do we stop it? We threaten people with lawsuits for billions of dollars. They sue the media and the media goes quiet.”
Wolff’s Track Record with Trump Lawsuits
Notably, Michael Wolff has written four books about Donald Trump:
- Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House (2018)
- Siege: Trump Under Fire (2019)
- Landslide: The Final Days of the Trump Presidency (2021)
- All or Nothing: How Trump Recaptured America (2025)
Trump threatened to sue over Fire and Fury. His lawyer sent a cease-and-desist letter claiming defamation. Trump never followed through. The book became a #1 bestseller, selling millions of copies.
“I’ve written four books about Donald Trump and have never been sued,” Wolff said. This gives Wolff confidence that Melania’s threats, like her husband’s, are more bluster than substance.
When Trump’s lawyer sent the cease-and-desist over Fire and Fury, Wolff’s publisher Henry Holt responded that no apology or retraction would be forthcoming and noted Trump’s complaint cited no specific errors.
The same pattern may repeat here. Melania’s letter lists 11 statements but doesn’t explain why they’re false or how they meet the actual malice standard required for public figures.
Is There a Settlement or Class Action?
No. This is an individual defamation/anti-SLAPP dispute between two parties. There is no class action. There are no affected consumers seeking compensation.
This is purely about:
- Whether Melania Trump can silence Wolff with defamation threats
- Whether Wolff can force the Trumps to testify under oath about Epstein
No settlement has been reached. Melania hasn’t even been formally served yet. The case is in its earliest stages.
What to Expect Next
Several scenarios could unfold in 2025-2026:
Service Issues Resolved: Once Melania is properly served, she’ll have to respond—either by filing an answer, moving to dismiss, or attempting to transfer the case to Florida.
Jurisdiction Fight: Melania’s attorneys are based in Florida. They might argue the case should be heard there, not New York. Wolff’s team argues New York is proper because Melania owns an apartment there and spends significant time in the city.
Motion to Dismiss: Melania could move to dismiss Wolff’s suit, arguing it’s premature since she hasn’t actually sued him yet—only threatened to. Courts would have to decide if the threat alone is enough to support declaratory judgment.
Discovery Begins: If the case survives dismissal motions, discovery starts. This is where Wolff gets subpoena power. He can demand documents, emails, and testimony.
Depositions: The moment everyone’s waiting for—Melania and potentially Donald Trump sitting for depositions, answering questions under oath about Epstein. This would be unprecedented.
Settlement: The Trumps might settle to avoid depositions. A settlement could include mutual non-disparagement clauses and confidential terms.
Trial: If no settlement, the case goes to trial where a jury decides if Melania’s defamation claims have merit.
Legal experts note the case puts the First Lady in a difficult position. If she proceeds, she faces brutal discovery and depositions. If she drops the threats, Wolff wins without her having to pay anything. Either way, he’s generated massive publicity for his forthcoming book.
Funding the Fight: GoFundMe Campaign
Wolff isn’t just relying on his own resources. He launched a GoFundMe campaign to partially cover legal expenses.
The crowdfunding approach serves dual purposes: raising money and building public support. Thousands of people who want to see Epstein files released view Wolff as fighting the fight they can’t.
The campaign frames the lawsuit as defending press freedom against powerful figures who use legal intimidation to suppress journalism.
FAQs
Q: Who is Michael Wolff?
A: Michael Wolff is a journalist and author who has written four books about Donald Trump, including the 2018 bestseller “Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House.” He co-hosts The Daily Beast podcast “Inside Trump’s Head.”
Q: Why did Michael Wolff sue Melania Trump?
A: After Melania’s attorneys threatened him with a $1 billion defamation lawsuit, Wolff preemptively sued her using New York’s anti-SLAPP law. This allows him to force her to prove her claims have merit and gives him subpoena power.
Q: What did Wolff say about Melania Trump?
A: Wolff made statements linking Melania to Jeffrey Epstein’s social circle, claimed Epstein told him Melania first slept with Trump on Epstein’s plane, suggested their marriage is a “sham,” and said Melania is managing the White House response to Epstein controversies.
Q: Has Melania Trump actually sued Wolff?
A: No. Her attorneys sent a threat letter demanding $1 billion in damages but haven’t filed an actual lawsuit. Wolff sued her first before she could follow through.
Q: What is an anti-SLAPP lawsuit?
A: Anti-SLAPP laws protect speakers from Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation—lawsuits designed to intimidate and silence critics through expensive legal fees rather than to win on the merits.
Q: Can Wolff really depose the Trumps?
A: If the case proceeds through discovery, yes. Wolff’s lawsuit gives him subpoena power to demand testimony under oath from Melania, Donald Trump, and other witnesses with knowledge of Trump-Epstein connections.
Q: Has Melania been served with the lawsuit yet?
A: As of December 18, 2025, no. Wolff has struggled to serve papers as the First Lady and her representatives have reportedly evaded service. He expects the court to allow alternative service soon.
Q: Is there a class action I can join?
A: No. This is an individual lawsuit between Wolff and Melania Trump. It’s not a class action and doesn’t involve compensation for affected parties.
Q: What happened to The Daily Beast article?
A: The Daily Beast retracted an article headlined “Melania Trump ‘Very Involved’ in Epstein Scandal: Author” and removed portions of a podcast episode after receiving complaints from the First Lady’s attorneys. They issued an apology.
Q: Will Trump release the Epstein files?
A: Despite campaign promises, the Trump administration has not released Epstein files. In July 2025, the Justice Department said no further information would be released.
Q: What is Wolff’s next book about?
A: Wolff is working on “The Art of Her Deal: The Untold Story of Melania Trump (Redux),” which reportedly explores Melania’s role regarding Epstein and Trump administration matters.
Q: How long will this case take?
A: Defamation and anti-SLAPP cases typically take 1-3 years from filing to resolution, depending on appeals and complexity. Given the high-profile nature and potential for protracted discovery, this could extend longer.
About the Author
Sarah Klein, JD, is a licensed attorney and legal content strategist with over 12 years of experience across civil, criminal, family, and regulatory law. At All About Lawyer, she covers a wide range of legal topics — from high-profile lawsuits and courtroom stories to state traffic laws and everyday legal questions — all with a focus on accuracy, clarity, and public understanding.
Her writing blends real legal insight with plain-English explanations, helping readers stay informed and legally aware.
Read more about Sarah