The amended defamation lawsuit filed by Donald Trump against the New York Times has expanded significantly, now running to 62 pages of legal arguments and claims.
Despite the increased length, the suit still seeks $15 billion in damages, the same figure demanded in the original filing.
The complaint was revised after Judge Stephen Merryday struck down the original filing sua sponte, citing its failure to meet basic procedural standards.
Judge Merryday found the original complaint standing “unmistakably and inexcusably athwart the requirements of Rule 8,” a blunt rebuke of the document’s structure and clarity.
Trump’s lawyer Alejandro Brito drafted the original complaint, which ran to 85 pages before the court intervened and forced a substantial revision.
That original version reportedly included Trump’s full professional history, with references to appearances on Wrestlemania V, All My Children, and The Nanny.
Brito was required to cut more than half of his original filing, stripping out passages that praised “President Trump’s transcendent ability to defy wrongful conventions.”
The revised complaint clocks in at 62 pages, still substantially longer than most defamation filings and still drawing scrutiny for its unconventional approach to legal argument.
Critics have noted that the lawsuit appears designed more as a public statement than as a straightforward legal claim against the newspaper.
The $15 billion damages figure remains among the largest sought in any defamation case against a major media organisation in recent US legal history.
The New York Times has not yet formally responded to the amended complaint, and the case continues to move through the federal court system.
Legal observers will be watching closely to see whether the amended filing satisfies Judge Merryday’s procedural requirements or faces further challenges from the bench.