Trump Has To Pay $392k For His NY Times SLAPP Suit

I mean, there was no way not to see this coming. Last year we wrote about how Trump had lost his vexatious lawsuit against the NY Times regarding its interactions with his niece, Mary Trump. Mary had leaked some tax documents to the NY Times, and Trump sued the Times, arguing (laughably) that this constituted tortious interference.

No, as we expected, it represented Trump doing what he often seems to love to do: filing bogus SLAPP suits to try to silence the press. This not the only Trump lawsuit against the NY Times (or other publications).

But, as we noted back in May of last year when this lawsuit was tossed out, NY Judge Robert R. Reed applied NY’s anti-SLAPP law to the case, meaning that Trump would be on the hook for the legal fees of the NY Times. It took some time, but last week Judge Reed said Trump needs to pay $392,638.69 in legal fees.

Not surprisingly, Trump had opposed the awarding of any legal fees, or said they should be substantially cut down from the requested amounts. That… didn’t work so well.

Considering the complexity of the issues presented in this action, the number of causes of action, the experience, ability and reputation of the defendants’ attorneys, the considerable amount in dispute, and the attorneys’ success in dismissing the complaint against their defendants… the court finds that $392,638.69 is a reasonable value for the legal services rendered.

Of course, who is Trump to complain? After all, he won $293,052.33 in an anti-SLAPP judgment based on a (yes, dumb) SLAPP defamation lawsuit that Stormy Daniels filed against him.

That’s no excuse for him to go around filing more SLAPPs of his own. One would hope that being on the other side of a SLAPP suit might teach him not to keep filing them himself, but no such luck.

Still, this is yet another example of the importance of anti-SLAPP laws. NY has a good one, but we need strong such laws not just in every state, but we need a federal anti-SLAPP law to guarantee these kinds of protections can be used everywhere in the country and in every court. Anti-SLAPP laws are fundamental to making sure that the 1st Amendment actually functions.