Newsom’s $787M Blow to Fox: Trump Dragged In!

Man speaking with flags in the background

Gavin Newsom’s $787 million defamation lawsuit against Fox News advances after a judge denies dismissal, opening the door to invasive discovery that could drag President Trump’s administration into a left-wing political circus.

Story Snapshot

Delaware judge rejects Fox’s motion to dismiss, forcing the network into costly discovery phase targeting internal emails and depositions.
Newsom sues personally over Fox hosts accusing him of lying about a Trump phone call amid LA immigration protests and troop deployments.
Suit demands exact Dominion settlement amount, seen as a headline-grabbing stunt to harass conservative media.
Fox calls it a political ploy for Newsom’s presidential ambitions, defending coverage as protected opinion on public facts.

Newsom’s Lawsuit Targets Fox Over Trump Call Dispute

California Governor Gavin Newsom filed a $787 million defamation lawsuit against Fox News on June 27, 2025, in Delaware Superior Court. The suit stems from Fox coverage of a phone call between Newsom and President Trump during Los Angeles protests against Trump’s immigration crackdown. Newsom claims Fox hosts Jesse Watters and John Roberts falsely accused him of lying by airing an edited clip and call logs. The governor asserts the last call occurred late June 6 Pacific Time, or June 7 Eastern Time, lasting 16 minutes. Trump later stated on June 10 he spoke with Newsom “a day ago,” prompting Newsom’s X denial of any recent contact.

Fox News displayed public call logs confirming Newsom’s timeline but omitted Trump’s “a day ago” remark in Watters’ segment. Watters questioned on air, “Why would Newsom lie and claim Trump never called him?” with a chyron reading “Gavin Lied About Trump’s Call.” Newsom’s complaint alleges malicious editing deceived viewers, violating journalistic standards and California’s Unfair Competition Law. He demands a retraction and on-air apology to drop the suit, filing personally rather than in official capacity.

Troop Deployments Spark Federal-State Clash

Protests erupted in Los Angeles on June 6, 2025, over President Trump’s aggressive immigration enforcement, including mass arrests. Newsom and Trump spoke that night, but Newsom insists deployments were not discussed. Trump deployed 2,000 California National Guard troops on June 7 over Newsom’s objections, followed by 700 U.S. Marines on June 9-10 to protect federal buildings. This rare federal override of state authority highlighted tensions between Trump’s second-term agenda and blue-state resistance. Conservatives view the deployments as necessary to restore order amid lawlessness fueled by open-border policies.

Newsom’s public rebuttal on X criticized Trump’s awareness, escalating the feud. Fox’s evening broadcast on June 10 amplified Trump’s narrative, aligning with the administration’s pushback against sanctuary state obstruction. The lawsuit frames this as “malicious propaganda,” but facts show call logs matched Newsom’s account, raising questions about his denial’s context during a national security operation.

Court Rejects Dismissal, Eyes Discovery Risks

A Delaware Superior Court judge denied Fox News’ 45-page motion to dismiss, advancing the case to discovery. Fox argued the suit is a “political stunt” for Newsom’s 2028 ambitions, with Watters’ remarks as protected opinion based on disclosed facts. The network noted Watters later clarified Newsom “wasn’t lying, just confusing,” seeking dismissal and attorney fees. Newsom’s team, led by Dominion lawyer Mark Bankston, pushes for emails, documents, and depositions potentially involving Trump, Watters, and Roberts.

This mirrors Fox’s 2023 $787 million Dominion settlement over election falsehoods, a figure Newsom explicitly copies as a “gimmick” per Fox. Legal experts note the high bar of “actual malice” under New York Times v. Sullivan, requiring proof of knowing falsity. Conservatives decry the suit as an assault on First Amendment rights, weaponizing courts to silence media scrutiny of Democrat leaders obstructing federal immigration enforcement.

Implications for Media Freedom and Politics

Short-term, discovery exposes Fox to internal communications, risking settlement pressures like Dominion. Long-term, success could chill conservative outlets covering verifiable disputes, especially against public figures resisting Trump’s America First policies. Newsom positions himself as a media accountability warrior, boosting national profile amid frustrations with past globalist overspending and border chaos. Yet, filing in Delaware exploits corporate venue, evading California protections.

Affected parties include LA residents enduring protests, California voters weary of Newsom’s grandstanding, and Fox audiences valuing unfiltered reporting on government overreach. Politically, it tests boundaries of defamation law post-Dominion, potentially eroding press freedom while amplifying debates on state-federal power. Trump’s administration stands firm on securing borders, undeterred by legal distractions from career politicians.