California Governor Gavin Newsom Launches $787 Million Defamation Lawsuit Against Fox News.
California Governor Gavin Newsom has initiated a high-profile defamation lawsuit against Fox News, seeking damages of $787 million over what he claims was a deliberate misrepresentation of a phone call with US President Donald Trump. The legal action, filed on Friday in Delaware Superior Court, where Fox News is incorporated, centres on a segment aired by Fox News host Jesse Watters, which Newsom alleges falsely portrayed him as lying about the timing of a conversation with Trump.
The lawsuit stems from a dispute earlier this month when Trump claimed during a 10 June press conference that he had spoken with Newsom “a day ago” regarding the deployment of 2,000 California National Guard troops to Los Angeles amid protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids. Newsom refuted this, stating no such call occurred on 9 June, and provided call logs showing their last conversation took place on 7 June. According to the lawsuit, Fox News, through Watters’ programme, aired a deceptively edited clip of Trump’s remarks, omitting context that supported Newsom’s account, and displayed a chyron stating, “Gavin Lied About Trump’s Call.” The governor’s legal team argues this was a calculated attempt to damage Newsom’s reputation and political standing.
“Rather than leave the matter alone or simply provide the facts, Fox News chose to defame Governor Newsom, branding him a liar,” the lawsuit states, asserting that the network’s actions were motivated by a desire to “protect President Trump from his own false statements” and harm Newsom’s future electoral prospects. Newsom, who is widely expected to run for president in 2028, told broadcaster MeidasTouch that the coverage “crossed journalistic and ethical lines” and constituted defamation with malice.
The $787 million damages sought mirror the amount Fox News paid in 2023 to settle a defamation case with Dominion Voting Systems over false claims about the 2020 US presidential election. Newsom’s legal team, led by attorneys Michael Teter and Mark Bankson, has offered to withdraw the lawsuit if Fox News issues a formal retraction and Watters delivers an on-air apology. In a letter to the network, they wrote, “If Fox News fails to issue a formal retraction and on-air apology, we will proceed with the lawsuit so that a jury can determine Fox News’s culpability and assign a monetary value to its ‘blatantly unethical’ conduct.”
Fox News has dismissed the lawsuit as a “transparent publicity stunt” aimed at stifling free speech critical of the governor. “We will defend this case vigorously and look forward to it being dismissed,” the network said in a statement. Legal experts note that Newsom faces a high bar to prove defamation, as public figures must demonstrate “actual malice” – that the defendant knowingly published false information or acted with reckless disregard for the truth, as established by the 1964 US Supreme Court case New York Times v. Sullivan.
The lawsuit has sparked debate, with some critics on social media platforms like X calling it a political manoeuvre, while supporters argue it challenges Fox News’ history of misleading reporting. “Until Fox is willing to be truthful, I will keep fighting against their propaganda machine,” Newsom said on X, also alleging that Fox’s actions violated California’s Unfair Competition Law by engaging in deceptive practices.
This legal battle comes amid heightened tensions between Newsom and Trump, particularly over the deployment of National Guard troops in response to protests in Los Angeles. Newsom’s legal team highlighted that the governor was attending a cancer fundraiser in honour of his late mother during the weekend in question, refuting unrelated claims by other media outlets, such as a New York Post story mocking his whereabouts.
As the case progresses, it is likely to intensify scrutiny of Fox News’ editorial practices and fuel discussions about the balance between free speech and accountability in media. For now, Newsom’s bold move positions him at the forefront of a broader political clash over truth and trust in American journalism.
