ВИБОРЧА ГАЗЕТА

Fox Settles Dominion Defamation Lawsuit for $787.5 Million, Avoiding Trial

Fox Corp. and Fox News on Tuesday settled a defamation lawsuit by Dominion Voting Systems for $787.5 million, averting a high-profile trial that would have put one of the world’s top media companies in the crosshairs over its coverage of false vote-rigging claims in the 2020 U.S. election.

The settlement was announced by Fox, Dominion and the judge in the case at the 11th hour, with a 12-person jury selected on Tuesday morning and the case poised to kick off with opening statements on Tuesday afternoon. Dominion had sought $1.6 billion in damages in the lawsuit filed in 2021, with Delaware Superior Court Judge Eric Davis presiding over the case in Wilmington.

Dominion disclosed the settlement figure, and its CEO John Poulos said Fox had admitted to telling lies about his company. Dominion attorney Justin Nelson said the settlement “represents vindication and accountability” and that “lies have consequences.” Dominion lawyers declined to answer questions about whether Fox News would apologize publicly or make reforms.

“We acknowledge the court’s rulings finding certain claims about Dominion to be false. This settlement reflects Fox’s continued commitment to the highest journalistic standards. We are hopeful that our decision to resolve this dispute with Dominion amicably, instead of the acrimony of a divisive trial, allows the country to move forward from these issues,” Fox said in a statement.

At issue in the lawsuit was whether Fox was liable for airing the false claims that Denver-based Dominion’s ballot-counting machines were used to manipulate the 2020 U.S. election in favor of Democrat Joe Biden over Republican then-President Donald Trump. Dominion had argued that these on-air claims caused the company “enormous and irreparable economic harm.”

Davis had ordered a one-day trial postponement on Monday before another delay on Tuesday, as the two sides reached a deal in private.

The deal spared Fox the peril of having some of its best-known figures called to the witness stand and subjected to potentially withering questioning, including executives such as Rupert Murdoch, the 92-year-old media mogul who serves as Fox Corp chairman, and Fox CEO Suzanne Scott as well as on-air hosts including Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity and Jeanine Pirro.

The decision to settle also followed a ruling by the judge last month that Fox could not invoke free speech protections under the U.S. Constitution in its defense.

Fox News is the most-watched U.S. cable news network, according to Nielsen.

The primary question for jurors was to be whether Fox knowingly spread false information or recklessly disregarded the truth, the standard of “actual malice” that Dominion must show to prevail in a defamation case.

In February court filings, Dominion cited a trove of internal communications in which Murdoch and other Fox figures privately acknowledged that the vote-rigging claims made about Dominion on-air were false.

Dominion said Fox amplified the untrue claims to boost its ratings and prevent its viewers from migrating to other media competitors on the right including One America News Network, which Dominion is suing separately.

Adding to the legal risks for Fox, another U.S. voting technology company, Smartmatic, is pursuing its own defamation lawsuit seeking $2.7 billion in damages in a New York state court. Fox Corp reported nearly $14 billion in annual revenue last year.

Fox had argued that claims by Trump and his lawyers about the election were inherently newsworthy and protected by the Constitution’s First Amendment.

Davis ruled in March that Fox could not use those arguments, finding its coverage was false, defamatory and not protected by the First Amendment.

Dominion in 2021 sued Fox Corp and Fox News, contending that its business was ruined by the false vote-rigging claims that were aired by the influential American cable news outlet known for its roster of conservative commentators.

The trial was to have been a test of whether Fox’s coverage crossed the line between ethical journalism and the pursuit of ratings, as Dominion alleged, and Fox denied. Fox had portrayed itself in the pretrial skirmishing as a defender of press freedom.

The complaints referenced instances in which Trump allies including his former lawyers Rudolph Giuliani and Sidney Powell appeared on Fox News to advance the false allegations about Dominion.

Dominion obtained internal communications and testimony from Murdoch and other Fox News executives and commentators. Murdoch internally described the election-rigging claims as “really crazy” and “damaging” but declined to wield his editorial power to stop them and conceded under oath that some Fox hosts nonetheless “endorsed” the baseless claims, Dominion told the court in a filing.

When Murdoch watched Giuliani and Powell make their claims about Dominion on November 19, he characterized them to Fox News Chief Executive Suzanne Scott as “terrible stuff damaging everybody, I fear,” according to the filing.

Under questioning from a Dominion lawyer, Murdoch testified that he thought everything about the election was on the “up-and-up” and doubted the rigging claims from the very beginning, according to Dominion’s filing.

Asked if he could have intervened to stop Giuliani from continuing to spread falsehoods on air, Murdoch responded, “I could have. But I didn’t,” the filing said.
…

How Election Lies, Libel Law Are Key to Fox Defamation Suit

A major defamation lawsuit against Fox News goes to trial Tuesday, carrying the potential to shed additional light on former President Donald Trump’s election lies, reveal more about how the right-leaning network operates and even redefine libel law in the U.S. Here are some things to know about the case. 

The case 

Dominion Voting Systems is suing Fox for $1.6 billion, claiming the news outlet repeatedly aired allegations that the company’s voting machines were rigged to doom Trump’s 2020 reelection campaign while knowing they were untrue. Fox contends that it was reporting newsworthy charges made by supporters of the Republican then-president and is supported legally by libel standards. After a one-day delay that raised the possibility of a last-minute settlement between the litigants, seating of the jury is scheduled to start Tuesday, followed immediately by opening statements.

Election disconnect 

Denver-based Dominion has produced evidence that prominent people at Fox didn’t believe the fraud allegations, even as the network gave Trump’s allies airtime to repeat them. Multiple staffers texted and emailed in disbelief as Trump latched onto increasingly tenuous claims of being robbed by voter fraud. Fox’s Sean Hannity said in a deposition that he did not believe the fraud claims “for one second” but wanted to give accusers the chance to produce evidence. Fox founder Rupert Murdoch, questioned under oath, agreed the 2020 election, won by Democrat Joe Biden, was free and fair: “The election was not stolen,” he said. Murdoch even wrote on Jan. 5, 2021, to a top executive urging that prominent Fox personalities issue a statement acknowledging Biden’s legitimate win. At the same time, Murdoch acknowledged that Fox hosts such as Lou Dobbs and Jeanine Pirro at times endorsed false claims of election fraud.

Fox’s fear 

The court papers have laid out a profound concern at Fox over the impact of its election night call that Biden had beaten Trump in the battleground state of Arizona — a call that was accurate. Fox scooped its rivals on the call, but it infuriated Trump and many Fox viewers, who expressed their anger and began tuning in to rival conservative media outlets such as Newsmax. Emails and memos released in the case show Fox executives were highly aware of a drop-off in their network’s viewership at the same time that Newsmax was gaining viewers, and the executives viewed that dynamic as a potential threat. 

Libel law 

In its defense, Fox has relied on a doctrine of libel law, in place since a 1964 U.S. Supreme Court ruling, that has made it difficult for some plaintiffs to prove defamation by news outlets. Public figures, and Dominion fits that standard in this case, have to prove not only that the information reported was incorrect but that the news organization acted with “reckless disregard” about whether it was true or not. Fox says Dominion can’t prove its case, but some First Amendment advocates suggest the voting machine company has a strong argument. Their worry is that a prolonged legal battle would give the Supreme Court a chance to change libel laws that would weaken protection for all the media. 

Judge’s ire 

The runup to the trial has been rocky for Fox, and not just because the public got a look at such private chatter as primetime host Tucker Carlson saying he “passionately” hated Trump. The trial judge has scolded the network for 11th-hour disclosures about Murdoch’s role at Fox News and about some evidence involving Fox Business host Maria Bartiromo, including recordings of her talking off-camera with Trump’s lawyers. (Fox lawyers later apologized to the judge about the Murdoch matter, saying it was a misunderstanding not intended to deceive.) Fox, meanwhile, won some legal fights over limiting what jurors can hear, including a ruling that bars testimony about the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol. 

Trump’s interest 

Trump has taken a keen interest in the case, judging by his social media posts. Always concerned about loyalty, and nursing a grudge about the Arizona call, he has expressed anger at revelations in the case that many people at Fox not only did not support his fraud allegations but privately disdained them. Trump had stepped up his criticism of Fox as the 2024 Republican presidential primary gained steam, but he recently has given interviews to Carlson and Hannity. 

The election 

Federal and state election officials, exhaustive reviews in multiple battleground states where Trump challenged his loss, and Trump’s attorney general found no widespread fraud that could have changed the outcome of the 2020 election. Nor did they uncover any credible evidence that the vote was tainted. Trump’s allegations of fraud also have been roundly rejected by dozens of courts, including by judges he appointed. 
…

Abortion Bans Raise Fears Inside Republican Party About Backlash in 2024

As a new election season begins, the Republican Party is struggling to navigate the politics of abortion.

Allies for leading presidential candidates concede that their hardline anti-abortion policies may be popular with the conservatives who decide primary elections, but they could ultimately alienate the broader set of voters they need to win the presidency.

The conflict is unfolding across the United States this week, but nowhere more than in Florida, where Republican Governor Ron DeSantis signed into law one of the nation’s toughest abortion bans on Thursday. If the courts ultimately allow the new measure to take effect, it will soon be illegal for Florida women to obtain an abortion after six weeks of pregnancy, which is before most realize they’re pregnant.

Even before he signed the law, DeSantis’ team was eager to highlight his willingness to fight for, and enact, aggressive abortion restrictions. The Florida governor’s position stands in sharp contrast, they say, with some Republican White House hopefuls — most notably former President Donald Trump — who are downplaying their support for anti-abortion policies for fear they may ultimately alienate women or other swing voters in the 2024 general election.

“Unlike Trump, Governor DeSantis doesn’t back down from defending the lives of innocent unborn babies,” said Erin Perrine, a spokesperson for DeSantis’ super political action committee, when asked about Florida’s six-week ban.

‘An electoral disaster’

DeSantis’ latest policy victory in the nation’s third-most populous state offers a new window into the Republican Party’s sustained political challenges on the explosive social issue. In recent days alone, Republican leaders across Iowa, New Hampshire and Washington have struggled to answer nagging questions about their opposition to the controversial medical procedure as Republican-controlled state legislatures rush to enact a wave of new abortion restrictions.

Republicans have suffered painful losses in recent weeks and months across Michigan, New Hampshire, Nevada and even deep-red Kansas in elections that focused, at least in part, on abortion. Last week in Wisconsin, an anti-abortion candidate for the state Supreme Court was trounced by 11 points in a state President Joe Biden carried by less than 1 point.

“Any conversation about banning abortion or limiting it nationwide is an electoral disaster for the Republicans,” said New Hampshire Governor Chris Sununu, a Republican who describes himself as “pro-choice” but also signed a law banning abortions in the state after 24 weeks.

Privately, at least, strategists involved with Republican presidential campaigns concede that the Republican Party is on the wrong side of the debate as it currently stands. While popular with Republican primary voters, public polling consistently shows that the broader collection of voters who decide general elections believe abortion should be legal in all or most cases.

Anti-abortion activists have been particularly vocal in warning Republican presidential candidates that the party’s base will not tolerate any weakness on abortion given that Republican leaders have been vowing for decades to ban abortion rights if given the chance.

Praise for DeSantis

Before this week, Kristan Hawkins, the president of the anti-abortion group, Students for Life of America, was unwilling to describe DeSantis as a leader in the abortion fight.

“This is his opportunity to show himself as a leader on this issue. That’s what’s exciting about this moment,” Hawkins said of DeSantis’ six-week ban. “He has done a lot, but we really needed to see action at the legislative level. I think this ‘heartbeat law’ fully cements his pro-life street cred.”

Such pressure ensures that the issue will remain central to the 2024 campaign as Republican presidential prospects begin to fan out across America to court primary voters. At the very same time, an escalating court battle over access to an FDA-approved abortion pill is forcing Republican leaders to answer more questions.

Former Vice President Mike Pence, long a vocal abortion opponent, condemned the abortion pill during an interview this week with Newsmax while vowing to “champion the right to life.”

“We’re going to continue to champion the interests of women born and unborn and pushing back against the abortion pill,” Pence declared.

Former United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley told Iowa voters this week that abortion is “a personal issue” that should be left to the states, although she left open the possibility of a federal ban without getting into specifics.

And in New Hampshire, just a day after launching a presidential exploratory committee, South Carolina Senator Tim Scott outlined his support for a federal law that would ban abortions nationwide after 20 weeks of pregnancy.

He tried repeatedly to refocus the conversation on Democrats’ “radical position” on the issue because they generally oppose any abortion restrictions whatsoever.

Sununu, the New Hampshire governor, said he counts Scott as a friend, but was surprised that he would openly discuss his support for a federal abortion ban in New Hampshire, a state long known for supporting abortion rights.

“Of all places to talk about a federal ban of abortion, New Hampshire ain’t it,” Sununu said. “He’s a good candidate and does a great job in the Senate. But know your audience here, man.”

Republican officials in Washington are still looking for answers as well.

Republican strategist Alice Stewart said Republicans must find a way to keep the focus on the failings of the Biden administration, the economy, crime and education in the 2024 campaign.

“Abortion poses a challenge for Republicans. There’s no denying it,” said Stewart, who initially cheered the Supreme Court’s Roe reversal. “Politically, it has become problematic.”
…