Trump sued Woodward and Simon & Schuster in late January 2023, arguing that the published tapes violated his copyright.

White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said that Trump gave access to Woodward because he was "the most transparent president in history".

[11] Trump gave 18 digital-tape recorded interviews to Woodward in the Oval Office and at night on the telephone, lasting nine hours in total.

[16] White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany responded to the interview by arguing "The president was expressing calm and his actions reflect that”.

"[18] Woodward was criticized for not publicly revealing Trump's thoughts on the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States prior to the imminent release of the book.

"[20] As a presidential candidate in 2016, Trump had opposed the Obama administration's policy of "strategic patience" towards North Korea and supported an open dialogue while simultaneously asserting a tough stance.

Many reviewers noted the historical importance of The Trump Tapes, but opinions differed regarding Woodward's interviewing and conclusions.

Ron Elving of NPR News was positive toward the audiobook, affirming that "There is no question that hearing Trump has an impact that reading alone cannot match.

"[29] Lloyd Green wrote in The Guardian that The Trump Tapes was a "chilling warning for US democracy" and describes it as "disturbingly relevant".

but also that "Woodward and so many of the people who worked for Trump continued to kid themselves about who he was and what he was capable of, even after spending hours with the man.

He does something outrageous—for example, tells Woodward that he, the president, takes no responsibility for the pandemic that is killing tens of thousands of Americans.

[4] Woodward and Simon & Schuster reiterated the historical importance of the audio, and claimed that the lawsuit was "without merit".

[33] In May 2023, Woodward and Simon & Schuster's lawyers filed two more motions to dismiss, stating that "Said audio was protected material, subject to various limitations on use and distribution—as a matter of copyright, license, contract, basic principles of the publishing industry, and core values of fairness and consent.”[34] In August, Judge M. Casey Rodgers ordered that the case be transferred to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.

[36] Intellectual property lawyers unrelated to the case expressed intrigue toward the suit due to the unexplored nature between American copyright law and recorded interviews.