Status of fox news vs smartmatic
Executive summary
Smartmatic is suing Fox News for $2.7 billion, alleging the network broadcast false, reputation-destroying claims after the 2020 election; both sides filed dueling motions for summary judgment and a New York judge heard argument in December 2025 on whether the case will go to a jury [1] [2]. Appellate rulings and discovery have kept the case alive: a New York appeals panel said Smartmatic plausibly alleged Fox Corp. had direct liability [3], and internal Fox documents and staff statements disclosed in filings are central to Smartmatic’s argument [4] [5].
1. Case at a glance — what Smartmatic alleges and what Fox denies
Smartmatic’s complaint says Fox News broadcast and amplified baseless claims that the company helped “steal” the 2020 election, harming Smartmatic’s business and reputation and justifying $2.7 billion in damages; Smartmatic frames its suit as defending elections and its commercial goodwill [1] [6]. Fox insists its coverage was protected reporting on newsworthy allegations by prominent figures, denies liability, counters that Smartmatic has other reputational problems, and has mounted counterclaims that the lawsuit seeks to chill speech [7] [8].
2. Where the courts stand — key rulings that kept the case alive
A New York appellate panel ruled on January 9, 2025 that Smartmatic had sufficiently alleged Fox Corporation’s direct liability for on-air statements and sent claims back for further proceedings, rejecting a wholesale dismissal of the parent company on the pleadings [3] [9]. As of December 2025, both parties asked a judge to rule on summary judgment; Justice David B. Cohen heard arguments and was expected to rule on whether the dispute proceeds to a jury trial [2] [1].
3. Discovery drama — internal documents, deleted texts, and what they purport to show
Thousands of pages of Fox internal communications have been filed in the litigation and are central to Smartmatic’s contention that on-air personnel and executives knew the fraud claims were untrue or promoted them to appease viewers [2] [4]. Smartmatic has alleged spoliation — that Fox custodians deleted relevant text messages from November–December 2020, creating an “evidentiary void,” while Fox denies the spoliation claims and says discovery disputes do not change the merits [10] [4].
4. Parallel legal and public pressures — Dominion settlement and criminal indictments
The Smartmatic case follows the high-profile Dominion settlement in April 2023, in which Fox paid $787.5 million; that background informs both Smartmatic’s theory and Fox’s defense strategy [7] [3]. Separately, a 2025 U.S. indictment accusing Smartmatic executives of foreign bribery in the Philippines has been invoked by Fox as potentially undercutting Smartmatic’s damages claims, though courts have been resistant to pausing the civil case pending the criminal matter [11] [12].
5. Competing narratives — reputational harm vs. free‑speech defense
Smartmatic frames its suit as redress for an asserted campaign of intentional falsehoods that destroyed trust and contracts [4]. Fox’s narrative emphasizes First Amendment protections for reporting on powerful actors’ allegations, suggests Smartmatic exaggerated its valuation to inflate damages, and argues the criminal indictment and prior reputational problems are relevant to damages and credibility [7] [10] [11].
6. What to watch next — likely decisive issues for the judge or a jury
Judges and, if it reaches trial, jurors will weigh whether Fox’s broadcasts were defamatory as alleged, whether Fox acted with actual malice or reckless disregard for truth, the credibility and import of internal communications and deleted messages, and the extent to which Smartmatic’s alleged outside problems (including criminal charges) affect claimed damages [2] [4] [12]. Justice Cohen’s impending summary‑judgment decision (decided weeks after the December 2 hearing) was flagged as likely determinative of whether the case advances to a jury [2] [1].
7. Limits of current reporting and open questions
Available sources document filings, motions, appellate rulings, discovery claims and the pending bribery indictment, but they do not contain a final trial verdict or a dispositive summary‑judgment ruling posted in the materials provided here; a final outcome is not found in current reporting supplied [2] [1]. The sources also differ on emphasis: Smartmatic stresses internal Fox documents and alleged destruction of evidence [4] [10], while Fox emphasizes First Amendment protection and Smartmatic’s alleged preexisting reputational issues [7] [10].
This dispute sits at the intersection of defamation law, editorial practices, and the business pressures of cable news; the documentary record disclosed so far has made the case far more than a simple “he said/she said” fight, but the ultimate legal resolution depends on pending judicial rulings that the available reporting has not yet finalized [3] [2].