The embattled Pulitzer Prize Board, unable to rid itself of President Trump’s defamation lawsuit, is making sweeping discovery demands as the suit inches closer to trial.

Mr. Trump is suing the Pulitzer Board for defamation over its decision to award the 2018 national reporting prize to the New York Times and the Washington Post for their coverage of now largely discredited allegations that Mr. Trump’s 2016 campaign colluded with Russia, and the Pulitzers’ subsequent defense of the decision.

The board — comprised overwhelmingly of liberal journalists from elite publications like the fiercely anti-Trump New Yorker magazine — has spent much of 2025 trying to convince courts to delay the trial until after the end of Mr. Trump’s second term. However, the board’s options for fighting the lawsuit were significantly limited in August when the Florida Supreme Court declined to take up its appeal of a lower court’s decision, which rejected its request to delay the trial. 

In a 12-page court filing, attorneys for the Pulitzer Board sought documents about Mr. Trump’s demand for the board to rescind its award to the Times and the Post. It also sought documents that show that the board’s statements “had a significant impact on the 2020 presidential election.”

The board is also seeking “all” of Mr. Trump’s tax returns from 2015 to 2025.

Additionally, the board wants the president’s health records.

“To the extent You seek damages for any physical ailment or mental or emotional injury arising from Counts I-IV of Your Complaint, all Documents (whether held by You or by third parties under Your control or who could produce them at your direction) concerning Your medical and/or psychological health from January 1, 2015, to present, including any prescription medications you have been prescribed or have taken,” the filing says. “For the avoidance of doubt, this includes all Documents Concerning Your annual physical examination. To the extent you do not seek such damages in this action, please confirm so in writing.”

The filing gives Mr. Trump 30 days from December 11 to respond to its demands. 

Mr. Trump’s lawsuit stems from the Pulitzer board’s decision in 2018 to award the Times and the Post the national reporting prize for their coverage of allegations that the 2016 Trump campaign colluded with Russian operatives to swing the election. The intense press coverage of the issue — much of which emanated from the Times and the Post — contributed to pressure to appoint a special counsel to investigate the allegations. The awards focused on 20 articles that were written in 2017.

In 2019, the special counsel appointed to investigate the allegations, Robert Mueller, said his probe did not find evidence that Mr. Trump’s campaign conspired with Russian operatives. Mr. Mueller’s team did find evidence of Russian interference. 

Mr. Trump has said Mr. Mueller’s report debunks the reporting from the Times and the Post and has called for the Pulitzer board to make the rare decision to rescind its awards. Since the prizes were established in 1917, the board has only rescinded one award, which was given to a Washington Post reporter, Janet Cooke. In 1981, the board rescinded the prize after Ms. Cooke admitted that her story about an 8-year-old heroin addict was fabricated.

After Mr. Mueller’s report was released and as pressure mounted for the Pulitzer board to rescind its prizes, it commissioned two independent reviews to evaluate the reporting it awarded. The board then made a serious legal error in 2022 when it announced its decision not to rescind the awards, saying, “The 2018 Pulitzer Prizes in national reporting stand.”

The board said that the two “independent” reviews of the award-winning reporting determined that no “passages or headlines, contentions or assertions in any of the winning submissions were discredited by facts that emerged subsequent to the conferral of the prizes.”

That statement reset the clock on the statute of limitations, opening the door for Mr. Trump to file his defamation lawsuit.

The board made several failed attempts to delay the lawsuit or get parts of it dismissed. Earlier this year, the board sought to have the lawsuit dismissed because 19 defendants do not live in Florida, and they argued that Florida courts did not have legal jurisdiction over them. However, a three-judge panel on the Fourth District Court of Appeal rejected that argument.

When that approach failed, the board tried a novel legal argument: That it has the ability to decide Mr. Trump is too busy to pursue his litigation. The board said that the case presents “constitutional conflicts” and that it would “interfere with his official duties and responsibilities.” The board also warned that allowing the lawsuit to continue would let courts “exercise ‘direct control’ over” the president.

But Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeal rejected that argument, saying the board was effectively asking the court to “invoke a temporary immunity under the Supremacy Clause on [Mr. Trump’s] behalf to stay this civil proceeding, even though [Mr. Trump] has not sought such relief.”

Throughout the process, the board has insisted it is defending “journalism and First Amendment rights.”

An attorney for Mr. Trump told Fox News that the president’s “powerhouse lawsuit” will reach a “winning conclusion.”