Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: Has Karoline Leavitt filed similar lawsuits against other media outlets in 2024 or 2025?
1. Summary of the results
Based on the available analyses, there is no evidence that Karoline Leavitt has filed similar lawsuits against other media outlets in 2024 or 2025. The sources consistently indicate that claims about Leavitt filing lawsuits against media organizations appear to be fictional or unsubstantiated.
Multiple sources debunk specific claims about Leavitt's alleged legal actions. One analysis confirms that "there is no evidence of a lawsuit filed by Karoline Leavitt against 'The View', and that similar claims about Leavitt and 'The View' have been debunked as fictional" [1]. Another source explicitly states that "Karoline Leavitt did not sue 'The View' for $800M" [2].
The legal actions mentioned in the sources are primarily initiated by President Trump, not Leavitt herself. Trump has filed a "$10 billion lawsuit against the WSJ, its parent company News Corp, and its owner Rupert Murdoch" over reporting related to Jeffrey Epstein [3] [4]. Additionally, Trump has a documented "history of filing defamation lawsuits against media companies, including ABC, CBS, and Facebook, and that he has won settlements in some of these cases" [5].
2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints
The question focuses on Leavitt as a plaintiff, but the analyses reveal that she is actually facing legal action rather than initiating it. The Associated Press has sued "White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt and two other administration officials over the White House's removal of AP reporters and photographers from the press pool" [6]. This represents a significant reversal of the premise in the original question.
The analyses also reveal administrative actions taken by the White House under Leavitt's leadership that could be confused with legal action. The White House "has taken steps to take over deciding which news outlets can cover the president at meetings and events when space is limited" and has "removed reporters from the WSJ from the pool of journalists scheduled to cover the president's upcoming trip to Scotland" [7] [8].
Media organizations and press freedom advocates would benefit from highlighting the distinction between actual lawsuits and administrative press restrictions, as conflating these could minimize concerns about press access limitations.
3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement
The original question appears to be based on false premises propagated through fictional news stories. One source includes "a disclaimer stating that the story is entirely fictional" regarding alleged lawsuits involving Leavitt [9]. This suggests that fabricated stories about Leavitt filing lawsuits may be circulating and being mistaken for factual reporting.
The question may inadvertently amplify misinformation by treating unsubstantiated claims as worthy of investigation. By asking about "similar lawsuits," it implies that Leavitt has filed at least one lawsuit against media outlets, when the evidence suggests she has not.
Purveyors of fictional political content would benefit from having their fabricated stories treated as legitimate news, as this increases engagement and potentially influences public perception of political figures and events.