Legal experts break down why Fox News is on 'shaky legal ground' as Dominion suit continues
Legal experts are weighing in on the legal proceedings pertaining to Dominion Voting Systems and Fox News, explaining just how detrimental the case could be for the right-wing news network.
Legal experts also explained how the case differs from other defamation cases. Catherine Ross, a George Washington University constitutional law professor with an emphasis on the study of First Amendment rights, offered her perspective on the unique circumstances surrounding the case.
“One just doesn’t see cases like this in defamation,” said Ross. “Fox does not appear to have any plausible defense particularly in light of what Dominion uncovered in discovery of real-time knowledge of falsity."
Despite the mounting evidence against Fox News and remarks from key members, the network argues, according to The Hill, that Dominion has focused on "'cherry-picking' quotes and strategically rolling out portions of what it obtained in discovery in order to drum up press coverage as it builds its case."
In a statement released earlier this week, the network laid out its argument.
“Dominion’s lawsuit has always been more about what will generate headlines than what can withstand legal and factual scrutiny, as illustrated by them now being forced to slash their fanciful damages demand by more than half a billion dollars after their own expert debunked its implausible claims,” the network said.
“Their summary judgment motion took an extreme, unsupported view of defamation law that would prevent journalists from basic reporting and their efforts to publicly smear Fox for covering and commenting on allegations by a sitting President of the United States should be recognized for what it is: a blatant violation of the First Amendment,” it said.
READ MORE: 'They can't do it': Dominion Voting Systems slams Fox News for failure to produce evidence of fraud
However, the legal experts have pushed back against the network's arguments. Ross used Sidney Powell, who worked for former President Donald Trump's legal counsel, as an example. Powell was one of the many Trump supporters who echoed his claims of voter fraud.
"You can cover this without giving a platform to people like Sidney Powell because when you invite her on her show, you’re responsible for her lies if you don’t correct them in real-time,” Ross said. “There are many, many ways of framing and covering that do not involve actually giving a platform or labeling something as actual news or a fact.”
Despite the incriminating details that appear unfavorably for Fox News, some legal experts have also noted something else unusual: there has been no indication of settlement discussions.
“Most of these kinds of cases ultimately settle, mainly because the media defendants don’t want to take the risk in the bad publicity,” said Carl Tobais, a law chairman at the University of Richmond.
“And the plaintiffs may be afraid they won’t win anything just because of the really high standard that the Supreme Court set in the New York Times v. Sullivan decision,” Tobais said. “It does seem in this particular case that Dominion may be making a pretty strong argument, so it’ll be interesting to see how it plays out.”
READ MORE: Fox News host 'strongly disagrees' with network banning discussion of Dominion lawsuit on-air
