Fox News has attempted to have the case dismissed at an early stage, arguing that its coverage is protected under the First Amendment and falls within the bounds of opinion-based commentary. However, the court has so far declined to throw out the lawsuit, indicating that Newsom’s legal team has presented sufficient arguments for the case to proceed to further review.
Legal experts note that defamation cases involving public figures such as Newsom are notoriously difficult to win. Under U.S. law, public officials must prove “actual malice,” meaning that the defendant either knew the statements were false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. This high standard, established in the landmark Supreme Court case New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, has long provided strong protections for media organizations.
Despite this legal hurdle, Newsom’s lawsuit appears to be gaining traction, at least procedurally. The court’s refusal to dismiss the case suggests that there are factual questions that may need to be resolved through discovery or potentially at trial. This phase could involve the release of internal communications, editorial decisions, and other evidence that might shed light on how the disputed content was produced.
The $787 million figure has drawn particular attention, as it mirrors the massive settlement Fox News agreed to pay in the high-profile case brought by Dominion Voting Systems in 2023. That case, which also involved allegations of false claims being broadcast, ended in one of the largest defamation settlements in U.S. history and has had a lasting impact on the media landscape.
Observers say the parallel raises the stakes for Fox News, both financially and reputationally. While the network has not indicated any willingness to settle at this stage, the Dominion case demonstrated the potential risks of prolonged litigation, particularly when internal communications become part of the public record.
Fox News continues to defend its coverage, maintaining that its reporting and commentary are protected forms of free speech. The network’s legal team is expected to continue pushing for dismissal or summary judgment as the case progresses.
