Dominion’s defamation suit against Fox set for trial while jury is chosen

WILMINGTON, Del., April 18 (Reuters) – The courtroom showdown in the $1.6 billion slander lawsuit by Dominion Voting Systems v. Fox Corp (FOXA.O) and Fox News went live Tuesday as a jury was chosen before opening statements in a trial that targeted one of the world’s leading media properties.

In one of the largest US defamation trials in decades, a jury will determine whether Fox is responsible for airing false claims that Denver-based Dominion’s vote-counting machines were used to rig the polls. 2020 election in favor of Democrat Joe Biden over the then-Republican. President Donald Trump.

After a one-day delay ordered by the Delaware Superior Court Judge Eric Davis in Wilmington, Delaware, attorneys representing the two parties have selected the 12 main jurors who will decide the case, and attorneys for those parties must make opening statements. The selection of alternate jurors continued.

The judge implored both parties to move quickly through what he said would be a six-week time frame.

“We are going to be strict. I am not going to give them extra time,” the judge said.

Journalists and members of the public began lining up outside the courthouse hours before it opened. A protester in front of the building held a sign reading “Fox is guilty.”

The trial will feature testimony from Rupert Murdoch, the 92-year-old media mogul, who serves as the chairman of Fox Corp, along with Fox CEO Suzanne Scott and on-air hosts Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity and Jeanine Pirro.

The judge did not reveal the reason for the 24-hour delay in the trial, but two sources told Reuters that Fox and Dominion had been holding last-minute talks to reach a settlement. Fox and Dominion could still crack the case.

In 2021, Dominion sued Fox Corp and Fox News, claiming their business was ruined by false claims of vote rigging aired by the influential American cable news outlet known for its roster of conservative commentators.

The primary question for jurors will be whether Fox knowingly disseminated false information or recklessly ignored the truth, the standard of “actual malice” Dominion must demonstrate to prevail in a defamation case. Based on a large number of internal communications, Dominion alleges that Fox personnel, from newsroom employees to Murdoch, knew the statements were false, but they continued to air them for fear of losing viewers to right-wing media competitors.

The trial is seen as a test of whether Fox’s coverage crossed the line between ethical journalism and the pursuit of ratings, as Dominion alleges and Fox denies. Fox has presented himself in the pretrial skirmish as a champion of freedom press.

A SECOND CASE OF DEFAMATION

Adding to the legal risks for Fox, another US voting technology company, Smartmatic, is seeking its own defamation lawsuit seeking $2.7 billion in damages in a New York state court.

In what could be a prelude to lawsuits seeking to hold directors accountable for any verdicts or settlements, Fox Corp shareholders are demanding company records that may show whether directors and executives adequately monitored Fox News’ coverage of Trump’s election rigging claims, sources told Reuters.

Fox has called Dominion’s $1.6 billion unrealistic claim for damages based on faulty economic models. An expert report commissioned by Dominion attributed dozens of lost contracts to Fox’s coverage, though much of the report remains under wraps.

Fox Corp reported nearly $14 billion in annual revenue last year.

Dominion has made defamatory statements about it aired on Fox shows including “Sunday Morning Futures,” “Lou Dobbs Tonight” and “Justice with Judge Jeanine.”

Dominion also cited evidence that some hosts and producers thought guests spreading false statements, including former Trump lawyers Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell, could not support their allegations.

Fox had argued that coverage of the vote-rigging claims was inherently newsworthy and protected by the United States Constitution’s First Amendment guarantee of freedom of the press. Davis rejected that argument in a ruling last month.

Reporting by Helen Coster in Wilmington and Jack Queen in New York; Edited by Will Dunham

Our standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.