President Donald Trump notched a significant legal victory this week in his ongoing effort to strip the New York Times and the Washington Post of their Pulitzer Prizes for reporting on alleged ties between his 2016 campaign and Russia — coverage he claims was false and defamatory.
A Florida appellate court on Wednesday rejected the Pulitzer Prize Board’s attempt to pause the defamation lawsuit, clearing the way for the case to proceed.
The board had argued that allowing the litigation to move forward while Trump is serving in office would raise constitutional concerns, but the court dismissed that claim, saying only the president himself could assert such privileges.
Trump on Thursday hailed the development as a turning point in his fight against what he called “fake, malicious stories” about alleged ties between his 2016 campaign and Russia.
“BREAKING! In a major WIN in our powerful lawsuit against the Pulitzer Prize Board regarding the illegal and defamatory ‘Award’ of their once highly respected ‘Prize,’ to fake, malicious stories on the Russia, Russia, Russia Hoax, by the Failing New York Times and the Washington Compost, the Florida Appellate Court viciously rejected the Defendants’ corrupt attempt to halt the case,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.
“They’ll have to give back their ‘Award.’ They were awarded for false reporting, and we can’t let that happen in the United States of America.”
The Fourth District Court of Appeal in Florida issued a seven-page ruling Wednesday that denied the board’s motion to stay proceedings.
The board had argued that allowing the case to proceed while Trump serves in office could raise constitutional issues, including concerns under the Supremacy Clause and the Take Care Clause of the Constitution.
The court flatly rejected that rationale, ruling that such privileges are not transferable to Trump’s legal opponents.
“Such privileges are afforded to the President alone, not to his litigation adversaries,” the court wrote. “Immunities and privileges, by their very nature, inure solely to the benefit of the individual for whom they are intended.”
“Allowing this case to proceed facilitates President Trump’s use of state courts as both a sword and a shield — allowing him to seek retribution against anyone he chooses in state court while simultaneously claiming immunity for himself whenever convenient,” the board told The Post in a statement.
“The Pulitzer Board is evaluating next steps and will continue our defense of journalism and First Amendment rights.”
Trump sued the Pulitzer board in December 2022, accusing it of defaming him when it defended its 2018 decision to award The New York Times and The Washington Post the Pulitzer Prize.
The board praised the outlets for their coverage of alleged Russian interference in the 2016 election and potential connections to the Trump campaign — reporting that Trump has long insisted was inaccurate and politically motivated.
The coverage fueled years of speculation and investigations, culminating in special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe, which found no conclusive evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government.
Despite that, the Pulitzer Board stood by its decision as recently as 2022, calling the reporting “deeply sourced” and “relentlessly reported.”
A Florida trial court previously ruled that the board’s public statement defending the award could qualify as an “actionable mixed opinion,” clearing the way for Trump’s defamation claims to move forward.
In its latest appeal, the board cited Trump’s own use of presidential immunity in unrelated defamation cases — such as the lawsuit brought by former “Apprentice” contestant Summer Zervos — to argue that it should likewise be entitled to a stay.
But the appellate judges said the comparison was flawed, noting that Trump is the plaintiff in this case, not the defendant.
“These cases are not substantially similar,” the court wrote. “When an officeholder chooses to initiate litigation, courts must assume the officeholder already has weighed the burdens on their official duties.”
The judges also dismissed the notion that the court’s involvement would interfere with Trump’s presidency, pointing out that he voluntarily filed the lawsuit and has not invoked any personal immunity to avoid participating.
“Whether the pursuit of this litigation is in his best interests, or consistent with the responsibilities of his office, is exclusively within Respondent’s purview,” the ruling concluded.
The decision allows Trump’s lawsuit to proceed to discovery, potentially forcing the Pulitzer Board and affiliated media organizations to turn over internal communications related to the controversial award.
Trump’s legal team has said it plans to seek depositions and documents that could reveal whether the board ignored doubts about the accuracy of the reporting it honored.
As the case moves forward, Trump has framed the legal battle as part of his broader campaign against the mainstream media, vowing to hold “Fake News” outlets accountable.
“We are holding the Fake News Media responsible for their LIES to the American People,” he wrote on Truth Social. “So we can, together, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!”
This story originally appeared on NYPost
