🔗 Share this article

In a key legal proceeding on Tuesday, a lawyer for the voting technology company Smartmatic argued that top leaders at Fox News, specifically Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, authorized a conscious plan to embrace baseless assertions of voting fraud promoted by Donald Trump.

“The conservative viewers, their primary audience, abandoned them,” stated J Erik Connolly, Smartmatic's lawyer. “So what do they do? They return back to what they know best: they go back to disinformation, pro-Trump propaganda and fear-mongering. The election narrative and the election fraud claims were the perfect vehicle for them to return to their core messaging.”

A Massive Defamation Lawsuit Is at Stake

During courtroom presentations, both parties pleaded with Judge David B Cohen to rule on essential aspects of Smartmatic's $2.7 billion legal action before a possible trial in the coming year. The company argues that Fox executives hatched a plan to “pivot” to Trump's claims to win back disaffected viewers.

Fox's Vehement Denial

A lawyer for Fox News, speaking for the network, strongly contested these accusations. “No campaign of misinformation was authorized,” he stated. “It is total bunk. It is not supported by the record. It is nonsense. It is made up by opposing counsel.”

He added that the Murdochs, who ultimately controlled the network, “didn't give anyone any orders to cover Smartmatic or the fraud claims.”

The Core Challenge: Proving “Actual Malice”

To win its case, the company will have to demonstrate that key figures at Fox News were aware the fraud claims were false but allowed them to be broadcast regardless. Through legal motions, Smartmatic cited private messages showing hosts like Jeanine Pirro and Maria Bartiromo voicing skepticism about the claims while also expressing a desire to assist Trump.

The network's attorney countered that Smartmatic has “wildly inflated” its value and the projected financial losses from the coverage. Fox contends its hosts were simply reporting on newsworthy allegations from the president's associates, not promoting them.

“This lawsuit really isn't about Fox's coverage of the 2020 election,” said Allen. “It concerns Smartmatic's effort 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 summary judgment decisions were decisive, finding that Fox's broadcasts were untrue and inherently damaging.

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

The Judge's Stance

The presiding judge gave no clear hints of his leaning but told Smartmatic's lawyer that proving “knowledge of falsity” for a pre-trial ruling would be a “hard sell.” He said he planned to review all relevant broadcasts before making a decision.

“I believe I have sufficient information, evidence, briefings, charts, charts and all I need to make my ruling,” he informed the two sides in the lawsuit.