🔗 Share this article

During a key legal proceeding on Tuesday, a lawyer for the voting technology firm Smartmatic contended that top executives at Fox News, including Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch, sanctioned a conscious strategy to adopt baseless assertions of voting fraud promoted by Donald Trump.

“Their core viewers, their bread and butter, abandoned them,” declared J Erik Connolly, the company's attorney. “What was their response? They revert to what they know best: they return back to misinformation, pro-Trump propaganda and xenophobia. The election narrative and the fraud allegations were the ideal tool for them to return to their core messaging.”

A Multi-Billion Dollar Libel Case Hangs in the Balance

During courtroom presentations, both sides urged with the New York state supreme court judge David B Cohen to rule on critical elements of Smartmatic's $2.7 billion defamation lawsuit before a possible trial in the coming year. The plaintiff argues that Fox leaders devised a plan to “shift” to the former president's allegations to recapture angry viewers.

Fox's Vehement Rebuttal

A lawyer for Fox News, representing the network, strongly contested these claims. “No campaign of misinformation was authorized,” he stated. “It is total bunk. The evidence does not support it. It is nonsense. It was fabricated by lawyers on the other side.”

He further asserted that the Murdochs, who held ultimate control over the network, “didn't give anyone any orders to cover Smartmatic or the election fraud allegations.”

The Core Challenge: Proving “Actual Malice”

To win its case, the voting firm will have to demonstrate that key figures at Fox News were aware the allegations were false but allowed them to be aired regardless. Through legal motions, Smartmatic has pointed to 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 worth and the estimated damages from the broadcasts. Fox contends its personalities were merely reporting on newsworthy allegations from the president's associates, not endorsing them.

“This suit really isn't about Fox's reporting of the 2020 election,” the Fox lawyer stated. “It concerns Smartmatic's effort to capitalize on comments made by the president's lawyers to rescue its financial livelihood.”

A Precedent Looms Large

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

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

Judge Cohen's Position

The presiding judge offered few hints of his leaning but told Smartmatic's lawyer that proving “actual malice” for a pre-trial ruling would be a “difficult task.” He stated he planned to examine all relevant broadcasts before issuing his rulings.

“I believe I have sufficient material, evidence, legal briefs, diagrams, charts and all I need to make my ruling,” he told the two sides in the case.