President Donald J. Trump, Plaintiff, got a welcome break this week in one of his battles with the media — but for the moment, only a temporary one.
As his $10 billion lawsuit against the BBC proceeds, a federal judge in Florida granted the president a temporary reprieve on Thursday from an order that he begin divulging details of his business empire’s financial performance — something he is clearly loath to do.
U.S. District Judge Roy Altman agreed to put that order on hold while he considers an amended complaint from Trump that would narrow his claim that he suffered damage to both business and reputation. By focusing only on the latter, Trump’s lawyers hope to avoid the need for the financial disclosures. That updated complaint has not been made public.
Trump filed the lawsuit in December over the way the British broadcaster, in a 2024 documentary, edited a speech he gave on Jan. 6, 2021, before protesters attacked the Capitol in Washington. It is one of many actions he has taken in his second term against media coverage that displeases him — in the courts, with executive action and in the overall presidential bully pulpit.
Trump contends that the BBC’s editing was misleading because it cut out, among other parts, a section where Trump said he wanted supporters to demonstrate peacefully. The claim seeks $5 billion in damages for defamation and $5 billion for unfair trade practices.
The publicly funded broadcaster has apologized to Trump over the edit but rejects claims it defamed him. The furor produced the resignations of the BBC’s top executive and its head of news.
Judge finds new Trump argument noteworthy
In Thursday’s order, Altman said he found “compelling” Trump’s argument that an amended complaint might remove the need for financial disclosures, an argument the BBC disagrees with. Under the order from a Miami-based magistrate judge, Enjoliqué Lett, Trump had been required to start releasing financial records by Thursday from businesses held by his family trust.
“If the plaintiff’s amendment obviates the need to compel a non-party to disclose confidential financial information,” wrote Altman, a 2019 Trump appointee, “we think it’s prudent to enter a brief stay of the Order until the amendment request is resolved.”
But where will the case go from here. And did the Trump legal team overreach in this case?
Seth Stern, advocacy director at the Freedom of the Press Foundation, notes that the president can simply drop the lawsuit if the BBC proves successful in arguing that disclosure of financial data is also relevant to reputational harm.
“Trump has a history of filing lawsuits and then just dismissing them before they get to discovery,” Stern said. “So there’s a chance he’ll do that and I’m sure it’ll give him a day or an hour of embarrassing headlines. But as we’ve seen countless times with Trump’s administration … no one headline seems to stick for very long, and I suspect that one would be no different.”
Stern thinks the BBC would be correct in arguing that financial data would still be relevant in the case. After all, the president is contending he suffered $10 billion worth of reputational harm.
“You cannot claim $10 billion in reputational damages when you’re the president of the United States and you won the presidential election after the reporting that you’re complaining about,” he said. “That makes no sense.”
He added: “For him to say that discovery into his economic damages is intrusive or in any way problematic, after he placed such an outrageous damages number on his lawsuit, is absurd.”
For now, the BBC trial is set for February
How long the legal maneuvering will take remains unclear. A trial is provisionally set for February in the case, which is just one of a host of legal actions Trump has initiated against media organizations whose coverage draws his ire.
The president is also seeking $10 billion in an ongoing defamation case against The Wall Street Journal over a sexually suggestive letter to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein that the newspaper said bore Trump’s signature. His Justice Department recently issued and then withdrew subpoenas to several New York Times journalists who reported on security concerns about his new, Qatari-gifted Air Force One jet.
Trump and his administration is also engaged in a battle with ABC, whose coverage he often objects to. His Federal Communications Commission has launched an early review of eight ABC local broadcast licenses well before they expire. Its chairman, Brendan Carr, also appears to be seeking to penalize ABC’s “The View,” where some hosts speak out against Trump, by revoking its exemption from equal-time rules.
The Associated Press has also sued Trump over access to the White House press pool, from which the news organization was curtailed for sticking with the name “Gulf of Mexico” after the administration ordered it rechristened the “Gulf of America.” The AP said it was retaining the term because the body of water crossed borders, but that it would would also note Trump’s renaming.
Stern, at the Freedom of the Press Foundation, feels that Trump will continue to press lawsuits — even those he may have no expectation of winning — unless courts suddenly decide to sanction his attorneys for filing frivolous lawsuits.
“Trump doesn’t care about losing a lawsuit or about spending a little bit of money on legal fees,” Stern says. “He understands full well that these aren’t cases he’s going to win. (But) he’s counting on them costing the defendants more than they cost him, in money, time and distraction. He’s counting on the initial headlines when he files a $10 billion lawsuit, making a big splash, and then his subsequent losses being an afterthought.”
