Newsom Sues Fox News for $787 Million Over Trump Call Coverage
California governor claims network misrepresented National Guard conversation in high-stakes defamation case.
California Governor Gavin Newsom has filed a $787 million defamation lawsuit against Fox News, alleging that the network misrepresented a phone call between him and President Donald Trump regarding the federal deployment of National Guard troops to Los Angeles. The lawsuit was filed in Delaware Superior Court and, according to a report by San Francisco Chronicle, accuses Fox of deliberately distorting facts and misleading the public.
Timeline Dispute and Misleading Narratives
Newsom asserts that the disputed call took place late on June 6 (Pacific Time), corresponding to the early hours of June 7 (Eastern Time), and focused mainly on Trump’s threat to withhold federal funding. The protests in Los Angeles were only briefly discussed, as reported by ABC7.
Days later, Trump told reporters he had spoken with Newsom “a day ago,” implying a second call. Fox News correspondent John Roberts aired a segment showing a 1:23 a.m. ET call log from June 7, which Newsom acknowledges but maintains was the only conversation. According to Business Insider, the lawsuit alleges that Fox exploited this timeline to imply dishonesty on Newsom’s part.
Defamation Claim Against Jesse Watters
Also named in the lawsuit is Fox News host Jesse Watters, who stated on air that Newsom had lied about the call. The complaint claims Watters failed to clarify that Trump’s “a day ago” remark could easily refer to the single acknowledged call, misleading viewers. This omission is a central component of Newsom’s case, ABC7 reported.
Echoes of the Dominion Settlement
The $787 million figure matches the amount Fox News paid to settle the Dominion Voting Systems defamation case in 2023. That settlement remains one of the largest in U.S. media history, according to The New York Times. Newsom appears to be drawing a deliberate parallel, signaling that he believes Fox’s conduct in his case is comparably serious. Business Insider noted the strategic framing of damages.
In comments to the San Francisco Chronicle, Newsom said, “Fox News should face consequences for misleading the public,” and emphasized the importance of accurate reporting when public safety and military coordination are at stake.
Mental Fitness and Presidential Clarity
The lawsuit includes pointed language about Trump’s cognitive sharpness. One footnote questions whether the call timeline confusion was intentional or indicative of diminished clarity. The complaint references Trump calling Biden “not the sharpest bulb,” framing the irony as part of the broader credibility gap.
Fox News Response and Legal Challenges Ahead
Fox News dismissed the lawsuit as a “publicity stunt.” In a statement published by the San Francisco Chronicle, the network argued the complaint is an attempt to chill political speech and vowed to mount a strong legal defense.
To prevail, Newsom must prove “actual malice,” the high legal standard for public figure defamation cases. This means showing Fox News either knowingly published false information or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. The standard, set by New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, is difficult to meet, especially without clear evidence of intent or gross negligence. ABC7 notes that this burden has historically made such suits hard to win.
Parallel Federal Lawsuit Highlights State–Federal Tensions
Newsom is also pursuing a separate federal lawsuit seeking to restore state control over California National Guard troops in Los Angeles. While that case is ongoing, federal authorities currently retain jurisdiction, as noted in the San Francisco Chronicle.
Together, these legal actions reflect a broader battle over state sovereignty, media accountability, and the boundaries of political storytelling in American governance. The outcomes may set precedents for future coverage of high-level communications involving public officials.