Author Michael Wolff has filed a lawsuit against First Lady Melania Trump in New York Supreme Court, Manhattan, after she threatened him with a $1 billion legal action over his public statements linking her to Jeffrey Epstein. The suit, filed on October 22, 2025, accuses the first lady of attempting to silence his free speech through intimidation tactics.
Wolff, author of “Fire and Fury,” invoked anti-SLAPP laws designed to protect journalists and critics from lawsuits intended to suppress public discourse. “Mrs. Trump’s claims are made for the sole purpose of harassing, intimidating, punishing or otherwise maliciously inhibiting Mr. Wolff’s free exercise of speech,” the lawsuit states.
The legal battle began after Melania Trump’s attorney, Alejandro Brito, sent a letter to Wolff on October 15, 2025, demanding he retract statements made about the first lady’s alleged connections to Epstein. Brito demanded a retraction, apology, and monetary payment from the author for comments Wolff made during an episode of the Inside Trump’s Head podcast and to The Daily Beast in July 2025.
Following the legal threat, The Daily Beast retracted the article and issued a public apology. “Upon reflection, we have determined that the article did not meet our standards and has therefore been removed from our platforms,” the publication stated in an editor’s note.
Melania Trump’s office issued a statement defending her actions. The first lady 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, according to the statement.
Wolff maintains that his statements were either taken out of context or protected speech. The lawsuit argues that the purpose of Melania Trump’s legal threats is to silence his speech and create an atmosphere where critics cannot freely exercise their First Amendment rights.
Through the lawsuit, Wolff seeks to depose both Donald Trump and Melania Trump under oath about their relationships with Epstein. The author had conducted extensive interviews with Epstein over several years before the financier’s death.
Epstein died by suicide in 2019 while awaiting trial. The case has remained a subject of public interest, with President Donald Trump having been friends with Epstein.
Wolff revealed additional complications in pursuing his legal case during a recent episode of the Inside Trump’s Head podcast on December 18, 2025. The author, 72, disclosed his struggles with serving legal papers to the first lady, 55, who he claims is avoiding him.
Wolff described multiple failed attempts to deliver the subpoena. He first tried serving papers through Melania Trump’s attorney, but the lawyer refused to accept service despite directing all communications through his office. A process service company then attempted delivery at Trump Tower, but staff members refused to accept the documents.
Trump Tower staff rejected the service, with employees stating they would discard the papers. However, they confirmed that Melania Trump resides at Trump Tower rather than at the White House, according to Wolff’s account.
The lawsuit argues that the threats against Wolff are part of a broader pattern. Wolff’s legal team contends that the Trump family and their supporters have made threatening costly legal actions a practice to silence critics.
The lawsuit maintains that Wolff’s investigation into the Epstein matter represents legitimate journalism that the public has an interest in understanding. The filing states that the Trump family has consistently sought to impede and suppress inquiry into Epstein-related matters.
Wolff has published multiple bestselling books about President Donald Trump and continues his investigative work through his podcast and upcoming publications. The author argues that allowing powerful figures to use billion-dollar lawsuit threats would fundamentally undermine press freedom and public discourse in the United States.
The case presents unique legal questions about the intersection of defamation law, First Amendment protections, and the ability of public figures to use legal threats as a tool to control narratives. Legal experts will be watching closely as the case proceeds through New York courts.
