🔗 Share this article

In a key court hearing on Tuesday, a lawyer for the voting technology firm Smartmatic contended that top leaders at Fox News, specifically Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, sanctioned a deliberate plan to embrace false assertions of election fraud promoted by Donald Trump.

“The conservative viewers, their primary audience, deserted them,” declared J Erik Connolly, Smartmatic's lawyer. “What was their response? They revert to what they know best: they return back to disinformation, political propaganda and xenophobia. The election story and the election fraud claims were the ideal tool for them to get back onto their core messaging.”

A Multi-Billion Dollar Libel Case Is at Stake

During courtroom presentations, both sides pleaded with Judge David B Cohen to rule on essential elements of Smartmatic's $2.7 billion defamation lawsuit ahead of a possible trial in the coming year. The company argues that Fox executives devised a plan to “shift” to the former president's allegations to win back angry viewers.

The Network's Strong Denial

A lawyer for Fox News, representing the network, strongly contested these accusations. “No disinformation campaign was ordered,” he stated. “It is total bunk. The evidence does not support it. It is hogwash. It was fabricated by opposing counsel.”

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

The Core Legal Hurdle: Proving “Actual Malice”

To win its case, the voting firm will have to demonstrate that important personnel at Fox News were aware the fraud claims were false but permitted them to be broadcast regardless. Through legal motions, 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.

Allen, Fox's lawyer countered that Smartmatic has “grossly exaggerated” its worth and the projected financial losses from the broadcasts. Fox contends its personalities were merely reporting on newsworthy allegations from the president's allies, not promoting them.

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

A Precedent Is Highly Relevant

Smartmatic's case closely mirror the successful legal action brought by Dominion Voting Systems against Fox. In that case, a judge's summary judgment decisions proved critical, ruling that Fox's statements were false and inherently damaging.

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

Judge Cohen's Stance

The presiding judge gave few indications 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 intended to examine all relevant broadcasts before making a decision.

“I think I have sufficient material, data, legal briefs, charts, charts and everything I need to reach a verdict,” he told the two sides in the lawsuit.