🔗 Share this article

In a pivotal court hearing on Tuesday, a lawyer for the voting technology company Smartmatic argued that senior executives at Fox News, including Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, sanctioned a deliberate plan to adopt baseless assertions of election fraud championed by Donald Trump.

“Their core viewers, their bread and butter, deserted them,” stated J Erik Connolly, the company's attorney. “What was their response? They return back to what they know best: they go back to disinformation, political propaganda and fear-mongering. The election narrative and the fraud allegations were the perfect tool for them to return to their core messaging.”

A Multi-Billion Dollar Defamation Lawsuit Hangs in the Balance

In courtroom presentations, both parties pleaded with Judge David B Cohen to rule on essential elements of Smartmatic's $2.7 billion defamation lawsuit ahead of a potential trial in the coming year. The plaintiff maintains that Fox leaders hatched a plan to “pivot” to Trump's claims to win back angry viewers.

Fox's Vehement Denial

K Winn Allen, representing the network, vigorously denied these claims. “No campaign of misinformation was authorized,” he said. “It is total bunk. It is not supported by the record. It is hogwash. It was fabricated by lawyers on the other side.”

He further asserted that the Murdochs, who held ultimate control over the network, “issued no directives to cover Smartmatic or the fraud claims.”

The Core Challenge: Proving “Knowing Falsity”

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

Allen, Fox's lawyer countered that Smartmatic has “grossly exaggerated” its worth and the estimated financial losses from the broadcasts. Fox maintains its personalities were simply discussing newsworthy claims from the president's associates, not promoting them.

“This lawsuit is not truly about Fox's coverage of the 2020 election,” said Allen. “It concerns Smartmatic's attempt to capitalize on comments made by the president's lawyers to salvage its business viability.”

A Precedent Is Highly Relevant

Smartmatic's case strongly resemble the prior legal action brought by Dominion Voting Systems against Fox. In that matter, a judge's summary judgment decisions proved critical, finding that Fox's statements were untrue and inherently damaging.

That legal decision was later cited as a key factor in Fox's decision to settle with Dominion for $787.5 million. A previous Fox executive noted that the judge's pre-trial rulings had “hamstrung” the company's legal defense at trial.

Judge Cohen's Stance

Judge Cohen offered no clear indications of his thinking but informed Smartmatic's lawyer that establishing “actual malice” for a pre-trial ruling would be a “hard sell.” He said he planned to examine all pertinent television segments before making a decision.

“I think I have more than enough information, data, legal briefs, diagrams, graphs and all I need to reach a verdict,” he told the two sides in the case.