Newsom demands apology, $787 million from Fox News
In a defamation lawsuit filed this week in Delaware Superior Court, Newsom claimed the network acted with "actual malice" in covering the timing and content of a conversation with Trump during a tense period of federal immigration raids in California. The amount Newsom is demanding in punitive damages mirrors the historic $787.5 million that Fox paid in 2023 to settle a defamation suit from Dominion Voting Systems over its 2020 election coverage.
According to the complaint, Fox News aired a misleading segment suggesting that Newsom lied about when he last spoke to Trump. The governor contends that Fox knew the facts but chose to manipulate them to cast him as dishonest and boost the president's narrative.
"The European Commission is requiring Apple to make a series of additional changes to the App Store. We disagree with this outcome and plan to appeal," Apple said in a statement.
The lawsuit follows comments by Fox host Jesse Watters, who, during a June 10 broadcast, questioned Newsom's integrity. "Why would Newsom lie and claim Trump never called him?" Watters asked on his show, Jesse Watters Primetime. A chyron below the broadcast read: "Gavin Lied About Trump's Call."
The clip referred to a phone call that occurred late on June 6 or early June 7 (Eastern Daylight Time), amid unrest following immigration enforcement actions in Los Angeles. Trump later claimed he had spoken with Newsom "a day ago" — a statement Newsom contradicted, saying no further communication occurred after their initial call.
Newsom's complaint states that Fox "intentionally distorted the facts by making a misleading video clip and multiple false statements" about the timing of the call. He argues this was done to brand him a liar and win political favour with Trump, whose administration had deployed National Guard troops and 700 Marines to California without the governor's consent.
The governor, a Democrat widely considered a potential presidential contender in 2028, is seeking both punitive and compensatory damages. He cites reputational harm, diminished public trust, and a potential impact on future campaign donations and voter support.
Fox News has rejected the claims outright, calling the lawsuit "frivolous" and accusing Newsom of trying to suppress criticism.
"Governor Newsom's transparent publicity stunt is frivolous and designed to chill free speech critical of him," the network said in a statement. "We will defend this case vigorously and look forward to it being dismissed."
Newsom's office has not yet issued further comment. However, according to The New York Times, he would consider dropping the suit if Fox issued a retraction and Watters publicly apologised for the remarks.
The legal bar Newsom must clear is high. Under U.S. defamation law — specifically the New York Times v. Sullivan precedent — public figures must prove that a media outlet acted with actual malice, meaning they either knowingly published false information or showed reckless disregard for the truth.
Newsom isn't the first political figure to take on a news outlet over defamation. Trump himself has launched multiple lawsuits in recent years, including a $15 million settlement reached with ABC in 2023 over an inaccurate claim regarding a civil jury's findings in a sexual misconduct case. He also sued CBS for $20 billion over edits to a 60 Minutes interview with Kamala Harris. A mediator has since proposed a $20 million settlement with CBS parent Paramount Global.
Fox Corp, the parent company of Fox News, is incorporated in Delaware, the same state where the Dominion case and Newsom's new lawsuit have been filed.
Whether the case results in another headline-grabbing settlement or is dismissed, it marks yet another chapter in the ongoing legal clashes between politicians and the media, where billions of dollars, reputations, and the boundaries of press freedom are all on the line.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Toronto Star
37 minutes ago
- Toronto Star
Mayors, doctor groups sue over Trump's efforts to restrict Obamacare enrollment
WASHINGTON (AP) — New Trump administration rules that give millions of people a shorter timeframe to sign up for the Affordable Care Act's health care coverage are facing a legal challenge from Democratic mayors around the country. The rules, rolled out last month, reverse a Biden-era effort to expand access to the Affordable Care Act's health insurance, commonly called 'Obamacare' or the ACA. The previous Democratic administration expanded the enrollment window for the coverage, which led to record enrollment.
CTV News
40 minutes ago
- CTV News
Canada Day 2025: Will this be the country's most patriotic birthday ever?
The Canadian flag will be flown high this Canada Day holiday, after repeated threats made by U.S. president Trump to make Canada the 51st state.
Winnipeg Free Press
an hour ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Mexican banks face cascading consequences following US sanctions
Mexico City (AP) — Three Mexican financial institutions sanctioned by the Trump administration last week have felt a cascade of economic consequences following the allegations that they helped launder millions of dollars for drug cartels. It comes after the U.S. Treasury Department announced that it was blocking transactions between American banks and Mexican branches of CIBanco and Intercam Banco, as well as the brokering firm Vector Casa de Bolsa. In presenting the sanctions on June 25, officials provided no evidence to back their claims, fueling criticism from Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum. Shortly after, Mexico's banking authority announced that it was temporarily taking over management of CIBanco and Intercam Banco to protect creditors. Sheinbaum said on Tuesday that the Mexican government is doing everything within it's power to ensure that creditors aren't affected, but said they were well 'within their right' to pull their money from the banks. The U.S. Treasury Department said that the sanctions would go into effect 21 days after the announcement. All three companies have fiercely rejected those claims. Despite that, the financial institutions have been dealt economic blows following the announcement, which are set to have stretching impacts on the companies. Monday Mornings The latest local business news and a lookahead to the coming week. Days after the announcement Fitch Rating downgraded the three institutions and other affiliates, citing 'anti-money laundering concerns' and saying the drop 'reflects the imminent negative impact' that the sanctions could have. 'The new ratings reflect the significantly more vulnerable credit profile of these entities in response to the aforementioned warnings, given the potential impact on their ability to meet their financial obligations,' the credit rating agency wrote in a statement. On Monday, CI Banco announced that Visa Inc. had announced to them with little warning that it had 'unilaterally decided to disconnect its platform for all international transactions' through CIBanco. The bank accused Visa of not complying with the 21-day grace period laid out by the U.S. Treasury Department sanctions. 'We would like to reiterate that your funds are safe and can be reimbursed through our branch network,' the bank wrote. 'We reiterate to our customers that this was a decision beyond CIBanco's control.' S&P Ratings also withdrew CI Banco from its ratings index, saying that it was because it had terminated its contracts with the bank following the U.S. Treasury announcement.
