Listen to the article
The allegations carry a familiar ring: Fox News aired outrageous lies that an election software company rigged votes in the 2020 presidential elections for Democratic nominee Joe Biden.
Behind the scenes, Fox News’ controlling owners, executives and biggest stars didn’t believe the wild claims from President Trump and his allies. Nonetheless, the voting tech company’s officials received death threats, and its reputation and financial prospects were badly damaged.
These claims stood at the heart of a hearing Tuesday afternoon before a New York judge over whether a multi-billion dollar defamation lawsuit against Fox News should proceed to a full jury trial.
London-based Smartmatic, which played a limited role in the 2020 race, is suing Fox for $2.7 billion after being accused on Fox shows of taking votes away from Trump and throwing them to Biden. The allegations closely echo those from a previous defamation lawsuit brought by Dominion Voting Systems, which Fox settled for $787.5 million in 2023 – a record in U.S. media litigation.
At Tuesday’s hearing, both parties argued for “summary judgment” to avert a trial. Smartmatic’s lead attorney, J. Erik Connolly, told New York State Supreme Court Justice David B. Cohen, “This is almost an unprecedented situation. There’s really no fight that [Fox] acted with reckless disregard for the truth…. Twenty-eight of the fact witnesses admitted they have no evidence to support any of the allegations.”
Fox’s legal team countered that after the 2020 election, the network’s stars genuinely believed Trump could have been cheated and simply wanted to report on his campaign’s claims. Attorney Winn Allen argued the stars’ statements could not meet the legal standard for defamation known as “actual malice” and disputed Smartmatic’s $2.7 billion damages claim.
The lawsuit names several Fox personalities as co-defendants, including the late Lou Dobbs, Maria Bartiromo, and Jeanine Pirro, along with Trump’s legal advisers Rudolph Giuliani and Sidney Powell, who appeared frequently on their shows.
Fox has maintained that its hosts were engaging in legitimate coverage of newsworthy claims by the president and his legal team. Trump’s campaign and allies, however, lost almost every legal challenge they filed against the election results.
The network spent considerable time during Tuesday’s hearing disputing Smartmatic’s financial claims. Allen characterized Smartmatic’s damage assessment as “a Rube Goldberg-like theory that builds inference upon inference,” presenting charts showing the company had not generated significant profits in over a decade.
Adding to the complexity, federal prosecutors charged Smartmatic in October with allegedly paying more than $1 million in bribes to a Philippine government official for contracts related to the 2016 elections there. Company officials denied the allegations, calling them “targeted, political and unjust.” Justice Cohen rejected Fox’s request to pause the litigation until those criminal charges are resolved.
Smartmatic was operating in just one U.S. jurisdiction during the 2020 elections: Los Angeles County, a heavily Democratic area in California. The company claims it was on the verge of major expansion in the U.S. and abroad when Fox personalities amplified unfounded claims from Trump allies, derailing its business prospects.
Internal communications revealed through court filings suggest few at Fox believed the claims made on air. Host Jesse Watters texted colleague Greg Gutfeld, “Think about how incredible our ratings would be if Fox went ALL in on STOP THE STEAL,” though he later testified under oath he never found such claims credible.
A workplace survey from summer 2020 revealed concerns among Fox staff about the network’s standards. One employee wrote, “We need a recalibration of our standards of conduct for our on-air talent, as well as the truthfulness of our reporting. It often feels like our editorial view and specifically our on-air talent has changed to just working for the current administration.”
Fox countered that these remarks represented a select few negative comments and noted it was designated a “Great Place to Work” by the organization conducting the survey.
The day after Smartmatic sued, Fox Business Network canceled Dobbs’ show. He never returned to Fox airwaves and died in July 2024.
Fox has previously settled major cases close to trial, most notably the Dominion case and suits involving their U.K. newspapers. The company appears to be maintaining a similar stance in this case, betting that Smartmatic’s own challenges might prevent another costly settlement.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
12 Comments
The claims of election rigging have been thoroughly debunked, yet the damage to Smartmatic’s reputation is done. Defamation lawsuits are crucial to upholding journalistic standards and safeguarding the electoral process.
Indeed, the spread of misinformation can have serious consequences. It’s concerning to see companies facing threats and financial harm due to unfounded conspiracy theories.
This case highlights the delicate balance between free speech and accountability. While the media should be able to report on and discuss electoral issues, they must do so responsibly and with regard for the facts.
You make a good point. Responsible journalism is essential for maintaining public trust in our democratic institutions. I hope this lawsuit leads to positive changes in how the media covers sensitive political topics.
This lawsuit seems to be another chapter in the ongoing saga over the 2020 election. It’s important that we have rigorous fact-checking and accountability around claims of electoral fraud, to protect the integrity of our democratic processes.
I agree, these allegations require thorough investigation and transparency. The public deserves to know the truth, regardless of political affiliation.
The allegations against Fox News are certainly concerning, but it’s important to wait for the facts to emerge before drawing conclusions. Defamation lawsuits can be complex, and the truth may not always be straightforward.
That’s a fair point. We should avoid rushing to judgment and instead let the judicial process play out. Maintaining an objective, evidence-based approach is crucial in these sensitive matters.
This case highlights the ongoing tension between free speech and the need to hold media outlets accountable for the information they disseminate. It will be interesting to see how the courts navigate this delicate balance.
Absolutely. This is a complex issue with no easy answers. I hope the courts can provide some much-needed clarity and guidance on the boundaries of acceptable media coverage, especially when it comes to sensitive political topics.
Smartmatic’s lawsuit against Fox News is a significant development in the ongoing battle against the spread of election-related misinformation. It will be interesting to see how the courts rule on this case.
Agreed. This case could set an important precedent for how media outlets are held accountable for the dissemination of false claims, especially those that can have serious real-world consequences.