What legal outcomes resulted from Dominion’s and Smartmatic’s defamation suits related to 2020 election conspiracy claims?

1. Dominion’s headline settlement with Fox and follow-on deals

Dominion’s marquee legal outcome was a $787.5 million settlement with Fox News reached in April 2023 that ended the network’s biggest defamation exposure and precluded a trial that had been set to begin ^[1]. That payment was part of a broader pattern of Dominion pursuing multiple defendants: Newsmax later agreed to pay Dominion $67 million to settle its separate $1.6 billion defamation suit ^[5], and reporting tallied more than $800 million in total recoveries for Dominion from various settlements and verdicts tied to 2020-election claims ^[6].

2. Judicial findings underpinning Dominion’s leverage

Delaware court filings and rulings strengthened Dominion’s position by finding the challenged election fraud narratives false and by rejecting some defendants’ motions to dismiss, creating leverage for settlements; a Delaware judge’s rulings and summary judgment language describing the falsity of key claims helped push defendants toward resolution ^{[7] [8]}. Dominion also pursued cases against individual promoters of the claims, and some of those matters produced additional judgments or settlements, reinforcing the company’s broader legal strategy ^{[3] [6]}.

3. Smartmatic’s settlements and its multibillion-dollar fight with Fox

Smartmatic settled with Newsmax in a confidential agreement announced in September 2024, which later reporting indicated included a disclosed $40 million figure in some accounts, ending what would have been the company’s first trial in the post‑2020 litigation wave ^{[2] [3]}. Smartmatic’s larger $2.7 billion defamation suit against Fox remained active years after filing; by late 2025 both sides were pressing judges for rulings and the case had produced thousands of pages of internal communications filed in court as evidence of what hosts and producers thought about the claims ^{[4] [9]}.

4. Broader legal themes, standards and collateral outcomes

These lawsuits tested the actual‑malice standard for defamation of public‑interest speech and relied heavily on internal communications and depositions to show knowledge or reckless disregard of falsity—a tactic that proved effective in at least strengthening plaintiffs’ claims and producing settlements in several high-profile cases ^{[8] [4]}. The litigation produced collateral rulings that limited some remedies (for example, a judge’s decision that Smartmatic could not seek punitive damages in at least one venue), which shaped settlement dynamics and potential recoveries ^[10].

5. Remaining litigation and open questions

As of the sources provided, not all suits had concluded: Smartmatic’s $2.7 billion case against Fox was still moving through the courts with hearings and motions aimed at resolving liability and remedial questions, and other defendants—including individuals and smaller outlets—faced separate suits that produced mixed outcomes, settlements, or jury decisions in related matters ^{[4] [3]}. Reporting also flagged ongoing document disclosures and competing legal strategies that could yield further rulings or additional settlements as cases continued to wind through state and federal dockets ^{[9] [8]}.

Conclusion

The legal outcomes to date show a decisive financial and reputational reckoning for major outlets that broadcast false 2020-election claims: Dominion extracted large settlements including a landmark $787.5 million payment from Fox and additional sums from other outlets, while Smartmatic secured at least one settlement and continues to litigate a multibillion-dollar claim against Fox with significant evidentiary disclosures already public ^{[1] [5] [2] [4]}. Where verdicts were not reached, pretrial rulings and internal documents materially shifted leverage toward the plaintiffs and reshaped how news organizations defend airing contested claims ^{[8] [7]}.