🔗 Share this article

In a pivotal legal proceeding on Tuesday, a lawyer for the voting technology company Smartmatic argued that top executives at Fox News, specifically Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, sanctioned a deliberate plan to embrace baseless claims of election fraud championed by Donald Trump.

“Their core viewers, their primary audience, abandoned them,” declared J Erik Connolly, Smartmatic's lawyer. “So what do they do? They return back to what they know best: they go back to disinformation, political propaganda and xenophobia. The election narrative and the election fraud claims were the ideal vehicle for them to return to their core messaging.”

A Multi-Billion Dollar Libel Lawsuit Is at Stake

During courtroom presentations, both parties urged with Judge David B Cohen to rule on essential aspects of Smartmatic's $2.7 billion defamation lawsuit ahead of a possible trial in the coming year. The plaintiff maintains that Fox leaders devised a plan to “pivot” to Trump's claims to recapture disaffected viewers.

The Network's Strong Rebuttal

A lawyer for Fox News, representing the network, vigorously denied these accusations. “No disinformation campaign was ordered,” he said. “It is completely false. It is not supported by the record. It is nonsense. It was fabricated by lawyers on the other side.”

He added that the Murdochs, who ultimately controlled the network, “issued no directives to cover Smartmatic or the election fraud allegations.”

The Central Legal Hurdle: Proving “Actual Malice”

For Smartmatic to prevail, the company must prove that key figures at Fox News knew the allegations were false but permitted them to be aired regardless. In its filings, Smartmatic has pointed to private messages showing hosts like Jeanine Pirro and Maria Bartiromo expressing doubt about the claims while also expressing a desire to assist Trump.

The network's attorney argued that Smartmatic has “grossly exaggerated” its value and the estimated financial losses from the broadcasts. Fox maintains its personalities were merely reporting on newsworthy claims from the president's associates, not endorsing them.

“This suit is not truly about Fox's coverage of the 2020 election,” the Fox lawyer stated. “It's about Smartmatic's attempt to seize on remarks made by the president's lawyers to rescue its financial livelihood.”

A Precedent Is Highly Relevant

The arguments closely mirror the successful defamation lawsuit brought by Dominion Voting Systems against Fox. In that matter, a judge's pre-trial rulings proved critical, finding that Fox's broadcasts were false and defamatory per se.

That legal decision was later cited as a key factor in Fox's decision to settle with Dominion for $787.5 million. A former Fox legal officer remarked that the court's initial decisions had “hamstrung” the company's ability to defend itself at trial.

The Judge's Stance

Judge Cohen offered few indications of his thinking but informed Smartmatic's lawyer that proving “actual malice” for a pre-trial ruling would be a “difficult task.” He said he planned to examine all relevant television segments before making a decision.

“I believe I have sufficient information, evidence, legal briefs, diagrams, charts and everything I need to make my ruling,” he informed the parties in the lawsuit.