Freedom of speech is arguably one of the most important parts of the Constitution of the United States. Despite its current status being debatable, in the past, freedom of speech had been one of the clear defining factors that differentiated the U.S. from other countries. However, in today’s day and age, freedom of speech has been attacked over and over, with one clear example being President Trump’s $10 billion lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal.
In July 2025, President Donald J. Trump sued the owner of The Wall Street Journal Rupert Murdoch, the publishing firm Dow Jones & Co., and two reporters for an article stating that Trump had sent a letter to registered sex offender Jeffery Epstein in 2003 that contained lewd drawings and sexual innuendos, as stated in a Freedom Forum article from April 16th, 2026. Epstein, who had pleaded guilty to prostitution charges involving children in 2008, had also been arrested in 2019 for sex trafficking charges that had stemmed from issues during the 2000s. Epstein allegedly killed himself in prison in 2019 roughly a month after his arrest.
The Epstein files are records related to the FBI investigation against Epstein, and include notes and reports by FBI agents, photographs, videos, and other pieces of evidence. Among the many public figures littered in these files, Trump stood out greatly, being named numerous times. He was known to have a strong relationship with Epstein that had started in the late 1980s and continued well into the 2000s.
Trump, who had called the controversy regarding the files a “Democrat hoax perpetuated by radical left lunatics,” in a Truth Social post, has called The Wall Street Journal’s reporting “false, malicious, and defamatory.”
However, this lawsuit only raises more questions than answers. More importantly, it asks us as Americans how far the president can go targeting journalists without attacking their freedom of speech and in turn, intimidating news outlets into not revealing the truth around powerful political figures.
Let’s pretend that the journalists are spreading false information in order to give Trump a bad name. A lawsuit is a plausible response. But, the thing that matters the most is that Trump is the president of the United States, and the public’s perception of how the president has handled what he considers to be slander against his name is extremely important. It sends a message that exposing the truth about high-profile citizens is something that comes with great consequences and danger. This is the dangerous direction that our society is heading towards, where news publications stray away from more controversial publications because of threats of lawsuits. Instead of handling these issues in a way that is expected of a president, Trump has tried to settle it in ways that intimidate the public and cause even more hostile feedback.
Trump’s negative reputation has reached many students. For instance, sophomore Evelyn Rayner said he is unprofessional, pointing out that what he posts on social media is inappropriate. Rayner said she feels that the Epstein files are “super negative,” and that “no one’s obligated to learn about it, but I think that it’s important to be mindful [about it].”
Freshman Justin Rehfeld shares the same sentiment regarding Trump, bringing up the fact that the president had previously wanted to bring down prices, but instead brought them up. “Gas and oil are more expensive. He said he was gonna make it cheaper. He hasn’t done that.” Rehfeld said he believes the Epstein files should have been handled in a way that was more respectful of the victims involved. “If you’re going to release the files, you need to do it in a way where you could ensure the safety and anonymity of the victims, which didn’t happen,” Rehfeld stated.
“I think anyone should say whatever they want, and America without free speech isn’t America,” Rayner said, when asked about the implications Trump’s lawsuit had about First Amendment rights: “It’s really shameful that our country’s president is involved in something like this.”
A student, who chose to remain anonymous, said that while they used to be more open to Trump’s policies prior to his presidency, including Trump’s plans for a more secure border, they also feel that what the current administration is doing is something that they cannot get behind. “I think that transparency is fundamental in our government,” they expressed. In regards to Trump’s lawsuit they said “I think that we should be prioritizing [transparency], and if our person in power isn’t doing that, that’s something that needs to be fixed.”
Junior Toma Galatanu considered the Epstein files interesting because of how people are trying to cover it up. He said that the lawsuit doesn’t surprise him, “[Trump] also shut down Jimmy Kimmel’s show because he was taunting him. In this case, he’s trying to cover it up. For Trump, free speech isn’t free speech anymore when it insults him, but I think free speech should exist.”
In the case’s ruling, U.S. District Judge Darrin Gayles dismissed the lawsuit “without prejudice,” and said the president had failed to prove the paper’s reporting on his relationship with Jeffery Epstein was defamatory, which was written in a Freedom Forum article. The judge had said that it was not proven whether the journalists had published the article with malice, which is a key piece of evidence needed to prove defamation lawsuits.
In any case, the Epstein files should be handled with complete transparency. With something so shocking, vile, and emotional, the truth is non-negotiable and should be presented to the public clearly. The public learning of this information, whether it be photographs or letters like the ones sent between Trump and Epstein, is more important than politicians feeling scared of their reputation being lowered.
