While everyone’s buzzing (kind of) about Melania Trump’s vanity film project premiering at the (Donald J. Trump) Kennedy Center, the real show is unfolding in a courtroom—and the first lady’s legal team just filed papers that read like a masterclass in avoiding accountability.
Author Michael Wolff, who sued Melania after she threatened him with a $1 billion lawsuit over his reporting linking her to Jeffrey Epstein, is now watching her lawyers attempt every trick in the book to make this case disappear. Their arguments? Let’s just say they’re creatively circular.
THE DETAILS: Melania’s defense rests on three pillars, each more absurd than the last.
First: she claims she was never properly served with legal papers. Here’s the catch—she’s protected by the Secret Service, won’t accept service at the White House, and when Wolff tried serving her lawyer Alejandro Brito in Florida (the same lawyer who told Wolff to route all communications through him), Brito refused to accept.
Trump Tower’s concierge confirmed Melania lives there but wouldn’t take the papers either.
You see the game here: By virtue of being first lady, Melania essentially argues she can’t be sued because she can’t be served. When Wolff asked a New York court to find an alternative, she moved to shift the case to federal court—which conveniently resets the whole “service” question.
Second argument: Wolff is just seeking publicity. The evidence? He raised $800,000 through GoFundMe to fund the lawsuit and continues writing about the first lady.
Apparently, needing money to fight someone with unlimited legal resources proves you’re not serious, and continuing to exercise free speech after being threatened for your speech is somehow inappropriate.
BUT BUT BUT: The third argument is perhaps the most telling. Melania wants the case moved to Florida—specifically to a jurisdiction “famously deferential to the president.” Her lawyers actually argue that New York’s stronger protections against using libel lawsuits to intimidate free speech would be “a complete perversion of justice.”
Translation: we’d prefer a court that doesn’t protect free speech too much.
Of course, there’s one problem with the Florida gambit: Melania Trump appears to actually live in New York. The Trumps announced their Florida move in 2019 with “great fanfare” and attacks on Democratic voters, but as Wolff notes, wealthy people often have a “flexible idea” of where they vote versus where they actually reside.
New York is where Melania’s “heart and body are,” where many witnesses are located, and where the Epstein-related activities at issue actually took place.
WHY IT MATTERS: This isn’t just about one lawsuit. It’s about whether being first lady means being above the law—literally unable to be held accountable in court because security makes you unreachable. It’s about whether threatening billion-dollar lawsuits to silence journalists works, and whether powerful people can simply forum-shop their way to friendly courtrooms when their intimidation tactics backfire.
Wolff will file his response in two weeks. The real blockbuster isn’t playing at the Kennedy Center—it’s about to unfold in court.