California’s Governor Gavin Newsom launched a stunning $787 million defamation lawsuit against Fox News, matching the exact settlement amount from the network’s Dominion Voting Systems case, over what he claims was deliberately deceptive editing that falsely portrayed him as a liar regarding communications with President Trump.
Key Takeaways
- Governor Newsom is suing Fox News for $787 million, claiming the network defamed him by editing video to misrepresent a phone call with President Trump.
- The lawsuit alleges Fox News hosts, particularly Jesse Watters, knowingly misled viewers by omitting Trump’s incorrect statement about when they supposedly spoke.
- Fox News has dismissed the lawsuit as a “transparent publicity stunt” designed to chill free speech critical of Newsom.
- Newsom has offered to drop the lawsuit if Fox News issues a formal on-air apology and retracts its claims.
- The case mirrors the Dominion Voting Systems lawsuit against Fox News, using the identical $787 million figure that Fox paid to settle that case.
Newsom’s Legal Challenge Against Fox News
Filed in Delaware Superior Court, where Fox News is incorporated, Governor Newsom’s lawsuit centers on what he claims was manipulative editing of footage to suggest he lied about a phone call with President Trump regarding National Guard deployment during unrest in Los Angeles. The legal action specifically targets how Fox News presented Trump’s claim about calling Newsom, when Newsom had publicly stated no such call occurred. According to the lawsuit, the network deliberately omitted crucial context that would have shown Trump was mistaken about the date of the alleged conversation.
The Governor’s legal team argues that Fox News engaged in malicious propaganda rather than legitimate journalism, deliberately distorting facts to portray Newsom negatively while supporting President Trump’s version of events. This type of manipulative reporting, Newsom contends, undermines principles of informed governance and public trust in media. The symbolic damage figure of $787 million exactly matches what Fox paid to settle the Dominion Voting Systems lawsuit, highlighting Newsom’s attempt to establish a parallel between the two cases.
Fox News Responds to Allegations
The conservative news network has forcefully pushed back against Newsom’s claims, characterizing the lawsuit as politically motivated rather than legally sound. “Gov. Newsom’s transparent publicity stunt is frivolous and designed to chill free speech critical of him,” stated Fox News in their official response to the allegations. The network has vowed to “defend this case vigorously and look forward to it being dismissed,” framing the lawsuit as an attack on their First Amendment rights rather than a legitimate defamation claim.
“Democrats across the country are out there yearning for Democrats to take on Trump. Partly through Trump’s stumbles and his own mistakes, I think that he has inadvertently boosted Newsom into the position of being the chief protagonist against him,” said Garry South, Democratic strategist.
The case has raised significant concerns among First Amendment advocates who worry about the potential chilling effect on news organizations. Katherine Jacobsen of the Committee to Protect Journalists cautioned that “Lawsuits like this risk becoming a form of censorship and send a troubling message to news organizations: that they may face legal retaliation for their work.” This perspective underscores the delicate balance between holding media accountable for false reporting and preserving press freedoms that are essential to democracy.
The Details Behind the Dispute
At the heart of the controversy is a disagreement over whether President Trump and Governor Newsom spoke about deploying the National Guard during periods of unrest in Los Angeles. Trump claimed he had a recent call with Newsom, while Newsom publicly stated, “There was no call. Not even a voicemail. Americans should be alarmed that a President deploying Marines onto our streets doesn’t even know who he’s talking to.” According to court documents, Newsom asserts he last spoke with Trump on June 7th, not about protests or the National Guard as Trump had suggested.
“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,” said Newsom in a statement regarding his lawsuit. “I believe the American people should be able to trust the information they receive from a major news outlet. Until Fox is willing to be truthful, I will keep fighting against their propaganda machine.”
The lawsuit specifically accuses Fox News host Jesse Watters of defaming Newsom by presenting a deceptively edited video that omitted Trump’s incorrect statement about the timing of their supposed conversation. By excluding this crucial detail, Watters allegedly portrayed Newsom as dishonest when, in fact, Trump had misremembered the date. Legal experts note that proving defamation against a media outlet requires demonstrating actual malice—showing Fox News knowingly published false information or acted with reckless disregard for the truth.
Political Implications
The timing of Newsom’s lawsuit has sparked speculation about his political ambitions beyond California. With Newsom widely considered a potential presidential candidate for 2028, this high-profile legal challenge against a conservative media powerhouse positions him as a bold Democratic challenger willing to confront perceived right-wing media bias. The lawsuit certainly appeals to Democratic voters frustrated with what they see as Fox News’ favorable coverage of President Trump and other Republicans.
However, the legal action also carries significant risks for Newsom. Defamation cases against media organizations are notoriously difficult to win due to strong First Amendment protections. Should the case be dismissed or ruled in Fox’s favor, it could backfire politically and provide ammunition to critics who already characterize Newsom as an authoritarian figure intolerant of opposing viewpoints. The Governor’s willingness to drop the lawsuit in exchange for an on-air retraction and apology suggests he may be more interested in the public perception battle than a protracted legal fight.
