California Gov.
Judge Sean P. Lugg let the lawsuit advance in Delaware’s Superior Court, calling it “reasonably conceivable” the conservative news network knowingly aired false statements when it reported that Newsom had “lied” about the phone exchange. Newsom, an aggressive Trump foil and likely 2028 presidential candidate, alleged in his court complaint that Fox deliberately mischaracterized his descriptions of the call.
Lugg’s decision, denying a bid to dismiss the case, rejected a range of defenses offered by Fox, including its attempt to invoke First Amendment protections. Newsom’s allegations have enough preliminary merit to move forward “even when viewed through the more discerning lens” covering defamation claims by public officials, the judge said in a 43-page ruling.
Newsom responded to the decision late Thursday in a social media post on X.
“Looking forward to discovery,” the governor wrote, a reference to the costly and cumbersome litigation stage that typically follows an unsuccessful motion to dismiss. The discovery process—which involves document exchanges and witness depositions—can sometimes surface embarrassing information, as it did in a previous high-profile defamation case against Fox.
Fox said Friday in a statement emailed to Bloomberg Law that the case reflects “nothing more than a blatant attempt to silence free speech and weaken the First Amendment.”
“We respectfully disagree with the court’s decision and plan to vigorously defend against this frivolous lawsuit,” the network said.
Defamation Hot Spot
Delaware has become a go-to venue for politically charged defamation cases in recent years, including a wave of litigation against Fox and Newsmax Media Inc. over Trump’s false claim that the 2020 election was rigged against him. French President Emmanuel Macron is also suing right-wing podcaster Candace Owens in the same court over her alleged “relentless and unjustified smear campaign” against his wife.
Fox resolved one of the election-related cases for $787 million, the same amount sought by Newsom. The eve-of-trial settlement with Dominion Voting Systems Inc. followed public disclosures suggesting media mogul Rupert Murdoch and Tucker Carlson, the network’s most influential anchor at the time, knew Trump’s claims were false even as the network was broadcasting them. That case sparked a shareholder suit in Delaware’s Chancery Court seeking to claw back the money from Murdoch and other Fox insiders.
Newsom’s lawsuit, filed last June, echoes a favorite tactic of Trump, who has frequently lobbed defamation claims at his political foes and media critics. The legal dispute concerns a 16-minute phone call about the president’s move to deploy thousands of troops in a crackdown on protesters who mobilized against widespread federal immigration raids.
Newsom repeatedly tried to broach the subject of ongoing protests in Los Angeles, but Trump “steered the topic away,” according to his lawsuit. Trump issued a proclamation within a day of the call activating the National Guard.
The call took place late June 6 in California, which translated to early June 7 on the East Coast. But when Trump said several days later that the call had been “a day ago,” Newsom responded online that “There was no call.” Fox’s coverage included an onscreen graphic stating that “Gavin Lied About Trump’s Call.” The segment was edited to omit Trump’s claim that the call had been “a day ago,” according to the court ruling.
Newsom is represented by Legal Accountability Center Teter Legal, Farrar & Ball LLP, and Farnan LLP. Fox is represented by Torridon Law PLLC and DLA Piper LLP (US).
The case is Newsom v. Fox News Network LLC, Del. Super. Ct., No. N25C-06-251, 4/30/26.
To contact the reporter on this story:
To contact the editors responsible for this story: