FOLLOW US

The Demand Letter — What It Asks For

The August 6 letter from Melania’s litigation counsel, Alejandro Brito. The letter demands that Biden (and his counsel, Abbe Lowell) ensure the statements are removed and retracted, along with a public apology. It asserts “overwhelming financial and reputational harm” from widespread dissemination — language that previews a damages theory if this becomes a full suit.

Where This Could Be Filed — And Why Venue Matters

District of Columbia: D.C. has an Anti-SLAPP statute (D.C. Code § 16-5501 et seq.) that allows an early special motion to dismiss speech claims tied to public issues. But the D.C. Circuit’s Abbas v. Foreign Policy Group decision holds that the D.C. Anti-SLAPP mechanism does not apply in federal diversity cases, because Federal Rules 12 and 56 “answer the same question.” Translation: if the case lands in D.C. Superior Court, Anti-SLAPP is in play; if it’s removed or filed in federal court, the Anti-SLAPP tool may be off the table — a strategic fork in the road for both sides. D.C. Law Library

Delaware: Delaware’s Anti-SLAPP law is narrow, largely limited to petitions involving public applicants/permittees (e.g., land-use contexts). A standard defamation claim between private parties over public-interest commentary typically won’t trigger it. If suit is filed there, Biden likely can’t use Anti-SLAPP as an early shield. Reporters Committee

Bottom line: Expect venue maneuvering. The first lady’s team could prefer a forum where Anti-SLAPP’s procedural hurdles don’t apply (e.g., federal court in D.C. or a state with weak Anti-SLAPP protections), whereas Biden would want the opposite.

What Melania Would Need to Survive an Anti-SLAPP (and Ultimately Win)

• Pin down falsity: Lean on longstanding, on-record accounts (Zampolli’s 1998 Fashion Week introduction) to establish the allegation is false. CNN Page Six
• Prove actual malice: Emphasize Biden’s reliance on a claim tied to a story that was retracted and the absence of independent verification — classic “reckless disregard” factors. Poynter
• Show harm with specificity: Demonstrate the measurable reputational and financial impact from republication across platforms (the demand letter previews this). Fox News
• Meet any Anti-SLAPP burden: In D.C. Superior Court, be prepared to show a likelihood of success on the merits (or satisfy evolving D.C. case law limiting discovery restrictions in Anti-SLAPP practice). C. Law Library

The Other Side of the Ledger

Biden’s potential defenses would include: