⚖️ Breaking: Gov. Newsom Files $787 Million Defamation Suit Against Fox News
In a dramatic legal move, California Governor Gavin Newsom filed a defamation lawsuit seeking $787 million in damages against Fox News and its primetime host, Jesse Watters, following claims that Newsom lied about his phone calls with former President Trump regarding the deployment of the National Guard. The lawsuit, lodged in Delaware—Fox Corporation’s home jurisdiction—accuses the network of airing a “deceptively edited clip” and making defamatory statements that slandered Newsom’s integrity during a politically volatile moment
📞 The Contested Phone Call: Timing and Truth
Central to the lawsuit is a puzzling discrepancy over when Newsom actually spoke with Trump:
-
Newsom’s position: He maintains he spoke via phone with President Trump late on June 6 (Pacific Time) — which corresponded to early June 7 Eastern Time — and that the call did not involve discussions about deploying National Guard troops to Los AngelesTrump’s claim: On June 10, the former president said he had spoken with Newsom “a day ago,” explicitly tying the call to the decision to send troops .
In response, Jesse Watters aired a segment on Fox asserting: “Why would Newsom lie and claim Trump never called him?” This was accompanied by an on-screen chyron reading “Gavin Lied About Trump’s Call.” Moreover, Watters ran a shortened clip of Trump’s statement, removing crucial qualifiers — a version Newsom’s attorneys allege was edited to mislead viewers
🧩 The Lawsuit’s Allegations and Demands
Newsom’s complaint asserts that Fox News and Watters:
-
Broadcasted false statements implying Newsom lied about speaking with Trump.
-
Manipulated video footage, omitting key context (“a day ago”) to push a false narrative.
-
Acted with “actual malice”, knowingly defaming Newsom to serve politically motivated goals, especially protecting Trump
-
Violated California’s Unfair Competition Law by deceiving viewers and damaging Newsom’s reputation.
The demands are multifaceted:
-
$787 million in punitive damages, mirroring Fox’s settlement with Dominion Voting Systems in 2023 .
-
A cease-and-desist order, preventing Fox News from continuing to air the allegedly defamatory content
-
A formal on-air apology and retraction from Fox News and Jesse Watters.
Newsom’s team has indicated they are willing to drop the suit if Fox issues the apology and retraction, with corrections receiving equal airtime to the original segment
💸 Why $787 Million?
The requested amount is not arbitrary—it mirrors the $787.5 million Fox paid Dominion in a high‑profile 2023 defamation settlement concerning election conspiracy claims . Newsom’s filing deliberately references that case:
“If Fox News wants to lie to the American people on Donald Trump’s behalf, it should face consequences—just like it did in the Dominion case.”
This strategic echo highlights a growing pattern in which plaintiffs seek accountability from major news outlets for allegedly misleading content.
🎤 Reactions: Public Figures and Fox News
🗣️ Newsom’s Voice
Newsom, a Democrat and rising figure often mentioned in discussions about the 2028 presidential race, has taken a bold stance against what he describes as Fox’s role as a “propaganda machine” In a video posted to X (formerly Twitter), he defiantly declared, “Enough of their lies,” and pledged to pursue the case no matter what .
🗣️ Fox News Denounces It
Fox News labelled the suit as a “transparent publicity stunt”, claiming it’s “frivolous and designed to chill free speech critical of him [Newsom].” The network has also pledged to “defend this case vigorously”
This confrontational stance reflects Fox’s belief that defending its editorial judgment is essential to preserving its credibility among its audience.
🏛️ The High-Stakes Legal Battlefield
Several broader factors elevate this suit far beyond a typical defamation claim:
-
Setting a Precedent: Coming on the heels of Dominion’s victory, the lawsuit could catalyze further challenges to media accountability and slander on-air.
-
Political Calculus: As a potential presidential candidate, Newsom is doubling down on issues of media honesty, free press ethics, and executive legitimacy.
-
Historical Echoes: The strategy here mirrors legal approaches once used by former President Trump, such as his suits against ABC News and CBS over allegedly edited interviews
-
Free Speech Questions: The case may explore constitutional boundaries—balancing First Amendment protections for news outlets with accountability for broadcast misinformation.
⏳ Road Ahead: What to Expect
🔹 Court Proceedings
The suit hinges on proving “actual malice”—that Fox knowingly broadcast falsehoods. Clearing this legal bar is notoriously difficult, but Dominion’s prior case may give Newsom hope businessinsider.com.
The jurisdiction in Delaware, chosen due to Fox’s incorporation location, is also notable; Delaware courts are known for robust corporate jurisprudence.
🔹 Political Fallout
Regardless of legal outcome, the mere existence of this suit sends ripples through media and politics. Newsom positions himself as a defender of truth, ready to challenge corporate influence. Fox, meanwhile, tests whether it can hold firm against a high-profile Democrat ready for courtroom warfare.
🔹 Possible Settlement
An amicable resolution—a public apology, content correction, and perhaps monetary settlement—remains possible. But Fox may resist, wagering that battling rather than conceding serves long-term brand interests.
🔍 Key Takeaways
| Insight | Analysis |
|---|---|
| Narrative Control | Newsom is fighting to establish accountability standards for major news networks. |
| Legal Leverage | The Dominion case offers both precedent and strategy. |
| Media Ethics | The lawsuit forces public discussion about editing practices in broadcast media. |
| Political Implications | Newsom’s assertiveness may bolster his national profile ahead of 2028. |
| First Amendment Tensions | The case underscores a perennial struggle to balance free speech with misuse of media platforms. |
✨ Conclusion
California Governor Gavin Newsom’s $787 million defamation lawsuit against Fox News and Jesse Watters is a bold escalation in the battle over media truthfulness in the digital age. It goes beyond a personal dispute—it speaks to a broader struggle over controlling narratives in an era where broadcast media and political power intersect. With potential precedent-setting implications, heightened scrutiny of Fox’s editorial practices, and Newsom’s own political ambitions, this legal showdown will likely shape the future relationship between media moguls and public officials—and maybe even the fate of future presidential campaigns.
