Dominion’s defamation suit against Fox poised for trial as a jury is picked By Reuters

By Helen Coster and Jack Queen

WILMINGTON, Delaware (Reuters) -The courtroom showdown in the $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit by Dominion Voting Systems against Fox Corp and Fox News was getting underway on Tuesday as a jury was chosen ahead of opening statements in a trial putting one of the world’s leading media properties in the crosshairs.

In one of the biggest U.S. defamation trials in decades, the jury will determine if Fox is liable for airing the false claims that Denver-based Dominion’s ballot-counting machines were used to manipulate the 2020 election in favor of Democrat Joe Biden over Republican then-President Donald Trump.

After a one-day delay ordered by Delaware Superior Court Judge Eric Davis in Wilmington, Delaware, lawyers representing the two sides picked the 12 main jurors who will decide the case, with the attorneys for those sides then due to make opening statements. Selection of alternate jurors continued.

The judge implored on both sides to move quickly through what he said would be a six-week time slot.

“We are going to keep it strict. I am not going to give you extra time,” 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 “Fox is Guilty” sign.

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

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

Dominion in 2021 sued Fox Corp and Fox News, contending that its business was ruined by the false vote-rigging claims that were 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 spread false information or recklessly disregarded the truth, the standard of “actual malice” that Dominion must show to prevail in a defamation case. Based on a slew of internal communications, Dominion alleges that Fox staff, from newsroom employees all the way up to Murdoch, knew the statements were false but continued to air them out of fear of losing viewers to media competitors on the right.

The trial is considered 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 portrayed itself in the pretrial skirmishing as a defender of press freedom.

A SECOND DEFAMATION CASE

Adding to the legal risks for Fox, another U.S. voting technology company, Smartmatic, is pursuing 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 make directors liable for any verdict or settlement, Fox Corp shareholders are demanding company records that may show whether directors and executives properly oversaw the Fox News coverage of Trump’s election-rigging claims, sources told Reuters.

Fox has called Dominion’s $1.6 billion damages claim unrealistic and based on flawed economic modeling. An expert report commissioned by Dominion attributed scores of lost contracts to Fox’s coverage, though much of the report remains under seal.

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

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

Dominion also has cited evidence that some hosts and producers thought the guests who were spreading the false statements, including former Trump attorneys Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell, could not back up their allegations.

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