In a significant development in the ongoing legal battle between California Governor Gavin Newsom and Fox News, the conservative media network has formally requested that a Delaware court throw out the governor’s high-profile defamation lawsuit, according to ABC News. The suit, originally filed in June 2025, seeks $787 million in damages and centers on broadcast statements made by Fox News host Jesse Watters regarding a phone conversation between Newsom and President Donald Trump.
The dispute traces back to early June 2025, during a period of heightened tension over immigration enforcement actions and related protests in Los Angeles. President Trump publicly stated that he had spoken with Newsom the previous day to express concerns about the governor’s handling of the situation. Newsom responded swiftly on social media, denying that any such recent conversation had occurred. Trump then shared evidence with Fox News, including a screenshot of call records showing that the two leaders had indeed spoken several days earlier.
That evening, Watters addressed the exchange on his program, questioning the accuracy of Newsom’s denial and suggesting it amounted to an intentional misrepresentation of the facts. Newsom’s legal representatives quickly demanded that Fox News issue a retraction and an on-air apology from both the network and the host, threatening litigation if their requests went unmet.
Fox News maintains that Watters later addressed the matter directly during a broadcast on July 17, 2025, clarifying that Newsom had not deliberately misled anyone and attributing any discrepancy to confusion rather than deceit. The network argues that this clarification resolved the core issue raised in the pre-lawsuit demand letter. In its motion to dismiss, filed in early August 2025 and still under consideration as of early 2026, Fox News contends that the original statements were substantially accurate, rooted in verifiable facts, and constituted protected opinion rather than actionable falsehoods. The filing emphasizes First Amendment protections for media commentary on public figures and disputes involving government officials.
The requested damages amount of $787 million closely parallels the settlement Fox News reached in 2023 with Dominion Voting Systems in a separate high-stakes defamation case tied to 2020 election coverage. Fox News has described the figure as an attention-seeking tactic rather than a genuine assessment of harm. The network further portrays the entire lawsuit as a calculated effort to generate publicity, advance Newsom’s potential political aspirations beyond California, and intimidate critical media voices rather than address any meaningful damage to his reputation.
The case is being heard in Delaware Superior Court, where Fox News is incorporated, allowing for jurisdiction over the network. In late January 2026, attorneys for both sides presented oral arguments before a judge on the motion to dismiss. The presiding judge took the matter under advisement, indicating that a ruling on whether the case can proceed to discovery and trial could come in the following months. No depositions or extensive evidence exchange has occurred yet, pending resolution of this threshold issue.
This litigation highlights broader tensions between prominent political figures and media organizations in an era of polarized coverage and rapid public disputes amplified by social media. Newsom, a frequent critic of certain national policies and media narratives, positioned the suit as a stand against what his side views as deliberate misinformation. Fox News, in turn, frames its defense around press freedoms and the risks of public officials using courts to challenge unfavorable reporting. As the matter remains unresolved in court, it continues to draw attention from legal observers tracking defamation standards for public figures, who must typically prove actual malice to prevail in such claims.
The outcome could influence how media outlets handle real-time political controversies and how elected leaders respond to perceived inaccuracies in coverage. With political speculation already building toward future national elections, the case underscores the intersection of law, media, and politics in contemporary American discourse.
Please add Cord Cutters News as a source for your Google News feed HERE. Please follow us on Facebook and X for more news, tips, and reviews. Need cord cutting tech support? Join our Cord Cutting Tech Support Facebook Group for help.