Newsom’s $787M Lawsuit Shakes Fox News

California Governor Gavin Newsom scores a court win against Fox News, advancing his $787 million defamation lawsuit and threatening free speech protections for conservative media.

Story Highlights

Delaware Superior Court denied Fox News’ motion to dismiss Newsom’s lawsuit, allowing discovery to proceed on defamation claims.
Newsom accuses Fox host Jesse Watters of falsely claiming he lied about a June 2025 phone call with President Trump amid Los Angeles protests.
Court found Newsom’s allegations of “actual malice” sufficiently pleaded, citing Fox’s alleged pattern of anti-Newsom narratives.
Fox calls the suit a political stunt tied to Newsom’s presidential ambitions, demanding dismissal and attorney fees.

Background of the Dispute

Governor Gavin Newsom filed a $787 million defamation lawsuit against Fox News in Delaware Superior Court in June 2025. The suit targets host Jesse Watters for airing claims that Newsom lied about speaking with President Trump. Newsom states their last call occurred on June 7, lasting 16 minutes, before Trump deployed 2,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles protests over Newsom’s objections. Trump told reporters on June 10 he spoke with Newsom “a day ago,” creating timing ambiguity. Fox displayed Trump’s call log confirming the June 7 contact alongside the remarks.

Watters questioned on air why Newsom would “lie and claim Trump never called him,” overlaying a chyron reading “Gavin Lied About Trump’s Call.” Newsom’s complaint argues this presentation deceived viewers, meeting defamation standards under California law and the Unfair Competition Law. The $787 million demand matches Fox’s 2023 Dominion Voting Systems settlement.

Court Denies Fox’s Motion to Dismiss

Delaware Superior Court Judge Lug denied Fox News’ motion to dismiss Newsom’s amended complaint. The ruling states the facts, viewed favorably to Newsom, allege Fox published false information with actual malice—knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for truth. Newsom cites Fox’s pattern, including a June 20 segment falsely claiming he attended a wine tasting during riots. The court deemed these allegations “reasonably conceivable” for recovery.

Fox argued Watters’ statements were substantially true opinions based on disclosed facts, protected by the First Amendment. The network later had Watters clarify on July 17 that Newsom “didn’t deceive anybody on purpose,” calling him “confusing and unclear.” Fox labels the suit a “headline-grabbing gimmick” and “political stunt” to boost Newsom’s national profile.

Implications for Free Speech and Politics

This early victory lets Newsom’s case advance to discovery, where internal Fox communications could surface, echoing the Dominion case. Conservatives worry this erodes media protections, especially after past successes defending against figures like John Brennan. Newsom’s suit fits a trend of politicians targeting outlets, with low trial success rates but high settlement pressure. Bill Maher criticized Newsom for mimicking Trump’s media tactics.

Gavin Newsom filed a defamation lawsuit against Fox News, with the network dismissing it as a "frivolous" publicity stunt designed to chill free speech.Filed in Delaware Superior Court, the $787 million suit stems from coverage of a call between Newsom and Donald Trump.

— TWD Channel 00 (@ChannelTwd) May 3, 2026

Trump’s administration faces this litigation amid ongoing tensions with blue-state leaders like Newsom, who opposed federal interventions in California unrest. The case tests “actual malice” standards from New York Times v. Sullivan for public figures. Fox seeks attorney fees, arguing no defamation occurred. Discovery may clarify if Trump’s “a day ago” was imprecise speech or deliberate misstatement, but risks chilling conservative commentary on Democrat officials.