Melania Trump Only Delayed Court Fight Because They Are 'Actually Separated', Biographer Asserts

Michael Wolff has accused Melania Trump's lawyers of delaying a legal dispute originating in New York to avoid scrutiny of her marriage to President Donald Trump. Speaking on Saturday's episode of Inside Trump's Head, the biographer alleged that the couple 'are actually separated'. The claim remains unverified and is Wolff's interpretation, not a court finding.

The dispute began when Wolff, who has written four books about the president, sued the first lady in New York state court. Her lawyers moved the case to federal court, arguing that she lives in Florida while Wolff lives in New York. Wolff contests her stated residence and believes the question should be examined more closely.

Melania Trump's Florida Residence Becomes Focus of Legal Challenge

Wolff told podcast co-host Joanna Coles on Saturday that his lawyers were challenging a federal judge's ruling from several months earlier. He described an appellate filing on Friday, although the account does not establish whether it was an initial appeal or a later submission. According to Wolff, the judge accepted the first lady's position on residence and rejected his request to question her about where she actually lives.

Wolff is seeking permission for discovery, a legal process through which parties can obtain information relevant to a case. He believes examining the first lady's residence would challenge the argument her lawyers advanced when they moved the lawsuit from state to federal court.

The judge's written ruling and the relevant appeal document were not included in the account of Wolff's remarks. The court's full reasoning and the prospects of his challenge therefore cannot be assessed from those remarks alone.

Michael Wolff Connects Melania Trump's Residence to Marriage Claim

Wolff's argument goes beyond which state should hear the lawsuit. He suggested that requiring the first lady to answer questions about her home would put her in a difficult position because of his allegation about her relationship with the president.

'It would be very difficult for the first lady to acknowledge that she not only does not live with her husband in Washington, she doesn't live with her husband in Florida either,' Wolff explained. 'They are actually separated. So they will do everything to resist that.'

The allegation is not an established account of the couple's marital arrangements. The reporting provides no independent corroboration of a separation and includes no response from Melania Trump or her lawyers to Wolff's latest accusation.

Wolff argues that the first lady's principal home is Trump Tower in New York City rather than a residence in Florida.

'Melania Trump genuinely lives in New York City,' Wolff insisted. 'That's where she physically spends most of her time. That's where her businesses are located. That's where her social life occurs.'

Those assertions remain Wolff's account of her arrangements. Even if a court established that the first lady spent substantial time in New York, that alone would not determine whether she and the president were separated.

Melania Trump Case Also Involves New York Speech Protections

Wolff stated that the first lady's lawyers cited her voting in Florida as evidence of residence. He challenged its significance, suggesting that property ownership in the state could explain it. His remarks do not independently establish either her primary residence or Florida's voting eligibility requirements.

According to Wolff, the appeal also challenges the judge's decision to abstain from ruling on a question of New York state law. He characterised that law as restricting threats of libel litigation intended to intimidate otherwise lawful speech. The exact statutory provisions and the judge's reasons were not detailed in the account.

Wolff accused the first lady's legal team of prolonging the case to avoid providing evidence. 'Their goal is to delay this as long as possible and to keep it from going forward, in other words, to stall it out,' he said. 'They don't want to give any kind of evidence.'

That allegation of deliberate stalling has not been established. The reported appeal leaves unresolved whether Wolff will be permitted to obtain further information about the first lady's residence, and no date for a decision was provided.