FOX news

A judge denied granting summary judgment to Fox News in its attempt to get Dominion Voting System's $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit thrown out Friday.

[Here's what Fox News was trying to hide in its Dominion lawsuit redactions](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/dominion-releases-previously-redacted-slides-fox-news-lawsuit-rcna77257) [Fox News producer alleges network coerced her into giving misleading testimony on Dominion](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/fox-news-producer-alleges-network-coerced-testimony-dominion-case-rcna75871) [Fox News executives discussed a plan to denounce the 'Trump myth' a day before the Jan. “The Court finds there are genuine issues as to material facts on whether FC 'published' the Statements,” he wrote, noting that Fox Corp. In his ruling, the judge rejected Fox's arguments. "We are gratified by the Court’s thorough ruling soundly rejecting all of Fox’s arguments and defenses, and finding as a matter of law that their statements about Dominion are false. “This case is and always has been about the First Amendment protections of the media’s absolute right to cover the news. “The Court finds, as a matter of law, that the Statements are either fact or mixed opinion,” he wrote. “It is wrong, legally and morally, to knowingly spread lies. The jury will be asked to consider whether Fox News journalists acted with actual malice — knowing falsity or reckless disregard for the truth — in publishing the claims, and whether damages are due. It also contended the claims were made with “actual malice,” which is defined as being made with “knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.” FOX will continue to fiercely advocate for the rights of free speech and a free press as we move into the next phase of these proceedings,” a Fox News spokesperson said in a statement. in the publication of the alleged defamatory statements. “The evidence developed in this civil proceeding demonstrates that is CRYSTAL clear that none of the Statements relating to Dominion about the 2020 election are true,” Davis wrote in his 81-page ruling, emphasizing the word "crystal" in his ruling.

A judge in Delaware has ordered a jury trial in Dominion Voting Systems' blockbuster lawsuit against Fox News, setting the stage for one of the most ...

“Dominion has offered proof demonstrating that the allegations were substantially false,” Davis wrote. “The evidence developed in this civil proceeding demonstrates that is CRYSTAL clear than none of the Statements relating to Dominion about the 2020 election are true. “Maybe Sean and Laura went too far,” Murdoch wrote to Scott. “We look forward to going to trial.” “I realized that the answers that they wanted me to say were putting me in a very vulnerable position to be the company scapegoat.” Davis’ judgement also came on the heels of a separate lawsuit filed by a former top producer at Fox who alleges she was coached in “a coercive and intimidating manner” to protect executives and on-air talent as part of the Dominion suit. [Rupert Murdoch,](https://thehill.com/people/rupert-murdoch/) owner and co-chairman of Fox Corp., worried to Fox News Media CEO [Suzanne Scott ](https://thehill.com/people/suzanne-scott/)that top hosts [Sean Hannity ](https://thehill.com/people/sean-hannity/)and [Laura Ingraham ](https://thehill.com/people/laura-ingraham/)“went too far” in endorsing former President Trump’s false claims about the 2020 election, fillings from Dominion showed. “Comparing the allegations at issue to the truth, the truth would have likely had a different outcome on the average viewer, as the statements at issue were dramatically different than the truth.” “Fox will continue to fiercely advocate for the rights of free speech and a free press as we move into the next phase of these proceedings,” the network said. Fox said in its own statement that “this case is and always has been about the First Amendment protections of the media’s absolute right to cover the news.” “We are gratified by the Court’s thorough ruling soundly rejecting all of Fox’s arguments and defenses, and finding as a matter of law that their statements about Dominion are false,” Dominion said in a statement to The Hill on Friday. The process of discovery has been an embarrassing one for the nation’s top-rated network, with a number of private communications and depositions by leading hosts and executives at the network in the post-election period brought to light.

The evidence in the case “demonstrates that is CRYSTAL clear that none of the Statements relating to Dominion about the 2020 election are true,” the judge ...

The Fox case has garnered the most attention of the company’s lawsuits, as recent court filings in the case have revealed [dozens of comments](https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2023/03/10/dominion-v-fox-news-here-are-the-most-explosive-comments-anchors-and-rupert-murdoch-made-about-the-2020-election-behind-the-scenes/?sh=1d9fa141aaeb) from such figures as Carlson, Hannity and Rupert Murdoch casting doubt on the fraud claims. [defamation cases](https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2023/02/15/court-lets-lawsuit-against-fox-news-move-forward-heres-where-dominion-and-smartmatics-defamation-suits-stand-now/?sh=5b568e42364a) the company and rival Smartmatic have brought against right-wing figures and news, including a separate Smartmatic case against Fox and several of its anchors. Carlson called the fraud claims “insane” and “absurd” and said he “hate[s] [Trump] passionately,” for instance, while Murdoch [admitted](https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicholasreimann/2023/02/27/murdoch-admits-fox-news-hosts-pushed-false-election-fraud-claims/?sh=5fb159d3494b) he did not believe the fraud claims but did not stop election deniers from appearing on the network and said, “I would have liked us to be stronger in denouncing [the fraud claims] in hindsight.” Defamation cases have typically been hard to prove in court, as plaintiffs must prove that the alleged defamer acted with “actual malice” knowing their claims were false, but legal experts have [speculated](https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2023-03-01/whats-next-for-fox-news-after-rupert-murdochs-bombshell-testimony-in-the-dominion-case) the substantial evidence of Fox officials discussing the fraud claims could be enough to meet that burden. [denied](https://courts.delaware.gov/Opinions/Download.aspx?id=345820) motions by Fox News and Dominion for summary judgment—which would have meant the case was decided without a trial—but did rule on Dominion’s allegations that claims made about its voting machines on Fox News were false. That’s how much Dominion is asking Fox to pay for its alleged defamation, though the final amount could end up being higher or lower based on what the jury decides. [to testify](https://edition.cnn.com/2023/03/21/business/fox-news-dominion-summary-judgment?utm_source=business_ribbon), which Fox has opposed. The trial is expected to be a high-profile affair, and Dominion has pushed for Fox Corporation chair Rupert Murdoch Fox has strongly opposed the $1.6 billion figure as being disproportionately high based on Dominion’s value as a company and its losses stemming from the fraud claims. Other major [witnesses](https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/mar/28/dominion-lawsuit-fox-news-hosts-executives-testify) who are likely to testify include Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity, Jeanine Pirro and Fox Corp CEO Lachlan Murdoch. and is it to settle for a few hundred million dollars and walk away and never discuss it again,” media law expert Daniel Novack told the [Hollywood Reporter](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/fox-news-dominion-lawsuit-first-amendment-1235354193/), while former federal prosecutor Tim Heaphy told [MSNBC](https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/fox-news-settle-dominion-rcna74038) he believes Dominion wouldn’t want to settle because “they want a lot of these facts to be laid bare in a courtroom in a public proceeding.” It’s still possible the case could be resolved before then if the two sides agree to settle, though so far there hasn’t been [any indication](https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2023/03/03/fox-unlikely-to-settle-with-dominion-over-election-lies-as-high-stakes-trial-nears-experts-say/?sh=5a7ec36e3c7f) that will happen. Sources at Fox cited by the [Los Angeles Times](https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2023-03-01/whats-next-for-fox-news-after-rupert-murdochs-bombshell-testimony-in-the-dominion-case) in early March said there was “no sign a settlement is near,” and legal experts are divided on whether they think the case could end before it goes to trial.

The defamation lawsuit between Fox and Dominion looks to be moving forward to a trial in April as a Delaware judge rejects all of Fox's motions.

The depositions of both Murdochs, as well as other Fox Corp. Attorneys have built the media company's case around the notion that "any reasonable viewer" of the news would be able to discern what was allegations or facts on Fox's networks. "The statements also seem to charge Dominion with the serious crime of election fraud. executives, are to be included in the trial, too. Still, Dominion argues, Fox continued to host guests such as Trump attorneys Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell, who repeated erroneous claims of election fraud. Dominion has argued Fox defamed the company, affecting its business, and acted with malice. In recent weeks, a trove of evidence has been released as part of the case, showing the hosts, as well as Rupert Murdoch, Last year, as part of Dominion's evidence gathering, the company deposed executives at both Fox Corp. "This case is and always has been about the First Amendment protections of the media's absolute right to cover the news. The former president, [who was indicted](https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/31/trump-indicted-ny-grand-jury.html) Thursday in an unrelated criminal matter, has repeatedly made false claims about the election being rigged against him. Judge Eric Davis of Delaware's Superior Court rejected Fox's arguments that it should bypass a trial since it's protected by the First Amendment. We look forward to going to trial," Dominion said late Friday afternoon.

A jury will decide whether Fox Corp defamed Dominion Voting Systems with false vote-rigging claims aired by Fox News after the 2020 U.S. election, ...

“This case is and always has been about the First Amendment protections of the media’s absolute right to cover the news," Fox said in a statement. Fox has argued that its coverage of the election claims was protected by press freedoms enshrined in the U.S. Delaware Superior Court Judge Eric Davis denied motions from Fox and partially granted Dominion motions to resolve the issue of defamation liability ahead of the scheduled April 17 trial date. The trial, to be held in Wilmington, is expected to last roughly four weeks. It is possible the parties could still settle the case. election, a Delaware judge ruled on Friday, dealing a setback to the media company that had sought to avoid a trial in the $1.6 billion lawsuit.

A voting machine company's defamation case against Fox News over its airing of false allegations about the 2020 presidential election will go to trial after ...

It ruled that plaintiffs needed to prove that news outlets published or aired false material with “actual malice” — knowing it was false or acting with a “reckless disregard” for whether or not it was true. “Fox knew the truth,” Dominion argued in court papers. Davis ruled that the statements Dominion had challenged constitute defamation “per se” under New York law. “In fact, although it cannot be attributed directly to Fox’s statements, it is noteworthy that some Americans still believe the election was rigged.” The U.S. “Fox will continue to fiercely advocate for the rights of free speech and a free press as we move into the next phase of these proceedings,” the network said in a statement Friday.

Federal judge refuses to dismiss $1.6bn defamation lawsuit against network, allowing the case to proceed to trial in mid-April.

“This case is and always has been about the first amendment protections of the media’s absolute right to cover the news,” the statement read. “Therefore, the Court will grant summary judgment in favor of Dominion on the element of falsity.” “We are gratified by the Court’s thorough ruling soundly rejecting all of Fox’s arguments and defenses, and finding as a matter of law that their statements about Dominion are false,” they wrote.

Dominion Voting's $1.6 billion defamation suit versus Fox News Channel appears headed to court after a judge's ruling Friday.

“This case is and always has been about the First Amendment protections of the media’s absolute right to cover the news,” Fox said in a statement. Among the Fox luminaries Dominion expects to call to the stand are Fox News Media CEO Suzanne Scott; prominent anchors like Tucker Carlson and Maria Bartiromo; and “Therefore, the Court will grant summary judgment in favor of Dominion on the element of falsity.” Still, he ruled that the statements Dominion had challenged constitute defamation “per se” under New York law, which means Dominion doesn’t have to prove damages to establish that Fox could be liable. It is the second legal proceeding made against Fox News for its coverage of the aftermath of the 2020 race for the White House. “We look forward to going to trial.” The case is expected to begin April 17.

Delaware Superior Court Judge Eric M. Davis ruled Friday that Dominion Voting Systems' blockbuster defamation suit against Fox News over baseless claims it ...

Dominion's spokesperson said the company was "gratified by the Court's thorough ruling soundly rejecting all of Fox's arguments and defenses, and finding as a matter of law that their statements about Dominion are false. "This case is and always has been about the First Amendment protections of the media's absolute right to cover the news," a Fox News spokeswoman said. "When viewed in the full context of the overall communication expressed during the segment, a reasonable viewer would understand that the Statement is asserting facts regarding Dominion, not an opinion." In a further instance, Davis ruled against Fox's argument of a "neutral reporting" privilege that protects it from any liability if it accurately conveys the allegations of newsworthy people. "A lot of the arguments that Fox has been making are now gone. "We now have a finding, as a matter of law, that Fox defamed Dominion," says Thomas Wienner, a retired Michigan-based corporate litigator who has been monitoring the case for NPR.

The judge said the case would still need to proceed to trial, for a jury to weigh whether Fox News knowingly spread false claims about Dominion Voting ...

In the decision, the judge left that question up to a jury. Dominion has argued that texts and emails between Fox executives and hosts proved that many knew the claims were false but put them on the air anyway. Dominion, in a statement, said: “We are gratified by the court’s thorough ruling soundly rejecting all of Fox’s arguments and defenses, and finding as a matter of law that their statements about Dominion are false. In Friday’s decision, Judge Davis said damages, if they were awarded to Dominion, would be calculated by the jury. Fox has argued that it was merely reporting on allegations of voter fraud as inherently newsworthy and that any statements its hosts made about supposed fraud were covered under the Constitution as opinion. Dobbs said: “I think many Americans have given no thought to electoral fraud that would be perpetrated through electronic voting; that is, these machines, these electronic voting companies including Dominion, prominently Dominion, at least in the suspicions of a lot of Americans.” RonNell Andersen Jones, a law professor and First Amendment scholar at the University of Utah’s S.J. For example, in a “Lou Dobbs Tonight” broadcast on Nov. The trial is expected to begin April 17. A spokeswoman for Fox said the case “is and always has been about the First Amendment protections of the media’s absolute right to cover the news.” Judge Davis said the case would proceed to trial, for a jury to weigh whether Fox spread false claims about Dominion while knowing that they were untrue, and to determine any damages. The judge said the case would still need to proceed to trial, for a jury to weigh whether Fox News knowingly spread false claims about Dominion Voting Systems, and to determine any damages.

Judge says 'crystal clear' that statements about Donald Trump's 2020 election loss were false.

For cost savings, you can change your plan at any time online in the “Settings & Account” section. Compare Standard and Premium Digital For a full comparison of Standard and Premium Digital,