How Many Times Has Fox News Been Sued for Defamation?

There is no official public registry that counts every defamation lawsuit ever filed against Fox News, so any single "total" number you see online is an estimate rather than a verified figure. What can be documented is the set of major, publicly litigated cases, and the most consequential by far is Fox's $787.5 million settlement with Dominion Voting Systems in April 2023, the largest known defamation settlement by a U.S. media company.

Information last verified on June 20, 2026. This page tracks publicly documented defamation litigation involving Fox News and Fox Corporation; it does not claim to be an exhaustive count.

Scope of this page: This article surveys publicly documented defamation litigation involving Fox News and its parent, Fox Corporation. It explains the cases generally and does not provide legal advice. For background on the underlying law, see Defamation Laws by State and defamation laws around the world.

Why There Is No Official Count

No court, regulator, or government agency maintains a master list of every defamation complaint filed against a single private company, so a precise "how many times" figure cannot be verified.

Defamation suits are filed in many different courts, state and federal, across the country, and most are tracked only by their individual docket numbers in the court where they were filed. There is no centralized national index that tags lawsuits by defendant company and topic. Some suits settle quietly and never produce a public ruling, while others are voluntarily dismissed before they draw attention. Because of this, the honest answer to "how many times has Fox News been sued for defamation" is that the major, well-documented cases can be counted, but a true grand total cannot be confirmed.

This page therefore focuses on the cases that left a clear public record: court opinions, public filings, official settlement statements, and, in the Dominion matter, a securities filing by Fox's own parent company. We update it as new cases are filed or resolved.

Dominion Voting Systems v. Fox: The $787.5 Million Settlement

US Dominion, Inc. v. Fox News Network, LLC was filed in the Delaware Superior Court on March 26, 2021, sought $1.6 billion, and ended in a $787.5 million settlement on April 18, 2023.

Dominion Voting Systems, a maker of election equipment, sued Fox News Network and later Fox Corporation in Delaware, alleging that Fox programs repeatedly broadcast false claims that Dominion machines had switched or stolen votes in the 2020 presidential election. Dominion sought $1.6 billion in damages.

On March 31, 2023, Delaware Superior Court Judge Eric M. Davis granted partial summary judgment to Dominion on the question of falsity, writing that the evidence made it "CRYSTAL clear that none of the Statements relating to Dominion about the 2020 election are true." That ruling meant the trial would focus on whether Fox acted with "actual malice," the demanding standard the First Amendment requires for defamation claims by public figures.

A jury was seated, and the trial was set to open on April 18, 2023. Before opening statements, the parties announced a settlement: Fox agreed to pay Dominion $787.5 million. Fox Corporation disclosed the agreement in a Form 8-K filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, stating that on April 18, 2023 it had "entered into a Settlement Agreement" resolving the litigation. In its public statement, Fox acknowledged "the Court's rulings finding certain claims about Dominion to be false." The settlement did not require Fox to issue an on-air apology.

Independent reporting and Dominion's own trial counsel described the $787.5 million figure as the largest publicly known defamation settlement ever paid by an American media company.

Smartmatic v. Fox: The $2.7 Billion Case Still in Court

Smartmatic USA Corp. v. Fox Corp. was filed in the Supreme Court of the State of New York (New York County) on February 4, 2021, seeks roughly $2.7 billion, and remained active as of June 20, 2026.

Smartmatic, another election technology company, brought a separate defamation suit in New York over the same broad 2020-election narrative. Its complaint named Fox Corporation and Fox News Network along with on-air figures Maria Bartiromo, Jeanine Pirro, and the late Lou Dobbs, as well as outside figures Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell. The suit seeks approximately $2.7 billion in damages.

The case has narrowed over time as courts ruled on motions. Reporting on the New York proceedings indicates that the individual claims against Sidney Powell were dismissed, and that the defamation claim against Jeanine Pirro was dismissed, while claims against the Fox entities and other defendants moved forward. On January 9, 2025, the Appellate Division, First Department, ruled that Fox Corporation must remain in the case, holding that Smartmatic had sufficiently alleged the parent company's direct liability for the on-air statements, while trimming a vicarious-liability theory.

In 2025 both sides filed competing motions for summary judgment, and on December 2, 2025 they argued those motions before New York Supreme Court Justice David B. Cohen. As of June 20, 2026, the case had not settled or gone to a jury, and it stands as the largest unresolved defamation claim against Fox. This page does not predict how it will be decided.

Karen McDougal v. Fox: Dismissed as Opinion

McDougal v. Fox News Network, LLC was dismissed by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on September 24, 2020.

Former model Karen McDougal sued Fox over a December 2018 segment in which host Tucker Carlson characterized her account of a payment as sounding like "a classic case of extortion." U.S. District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil dismissed the suit, concluding that a reasonable viewer would understand Carlson's statements as opinion and rhetorical hyperbole framing a political debate, rather than as factual assertions that could support a defamation claim. The court also found McDougal had not plausibly alleged actual malice. The dismissal ended the case at the pleading stage.

Ray Epps v. Fox: Dismissed in 2024

Ray Epps's defamation suit against Fox News was dismissed by the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware on November 27, 2024.

Ray Epps, a former Marine who became a focus of conspiracy theories about the January 6, 2021 Capitol riot, sued Fox in July 2023. He alleged that Fox segments, many hosted by Tucker Carlson, falsely suggested he was a government agent who helped instigate the attack, and that the coverage led to threats against him. U.S. District Judge Jennifer L. Hall granted Fox's motion to dismiss on November 27, 2024. The case was dismissed by the court; it was not a settlement. Coverage at the time noted the dismissal was entered without an accompanying written opinion explaining the reasoning in detail.

Majed Khalil v. Fox: A Confidential Settlement

Fox confidentially settled a 2020-election defamation suit brought by Venezuelan businessman Majed Khalil in April 2023.

Majed Khalil, a Venezuelan businessman, sued Fox after former Fox Business host Lou Dobbs publicly named him as a purported participant in a scheme to rig the 2020 election. In April 2023, around the same time as the Dominion resolution, Fox settled Khalil's claim. The terms of that settlement were not made public, so no dollar figure can be verified.

Chronological Case Rundown

The table below summarizes the major publicly documented defamation cases involving Fox News and Fox Corporation. Dollar figures are the amounts claimed unless an outcome figure is shown.

The count of notable cases covered here is five. Smaller suits, suits resolved without public dockets, and matters dismissed quickly may not appear in this list, which is why this page does not assert a definitive total.

Analysis: Why This Matters

The following is analysis from the Recording Law Editorial Team.

The Dominion settlement is historically significant for two reasons. First, the size: $787.5 million dwarfs prior media defamation payouts, and it landed only after a judge had already ruled, as a matter of law, that the underlying statements were false. That sequence is unusual. In most defamation cases the central fight is over whether a statement is even false; here, that question had been answered before the jury was empaneled, leaving Fox to litigate only actual malice in front of a jury that would have heard extensive internal communications. Settling at that posture, rather than risking a verdict, signals how exposed a defendant can be once falsity is established.

Second, the cases collectively illustrate how high the constitutional bar for defamation remains, and how outcomes diverge. The McDougal and Epps suits were dismissed because courts found the statements were protected opinion or because the plaintiffs could not meet the actual-malice and pleading standards that govern public-figure and public-interest claims. The Dominion and Smartmatic matters survived those hurdles because the plaintiffs marshaled detailed evidence about what Fox personnel allegedly knew. The lesson for readers is not that suing a broadcaster is easy or hard in the abstract, but that defamation law turns on specifics: whether a statement is provably false, who the plaintiff is, and what the speaker knew or recklessly disregarded. For the legal framework behind these distinctions, see our overview of defamation laws by state. We are not predicting how the open Smartmatic case will resolve.

How This Affects You

This section describes general implications, not advice about any specific situation. The Fox cases are a high-profile window into how U.S. defamation law works, but the same principles, falsity, fault, and damages, apply to ordinary disputes too. Whether a statement is actionable depends on facts that vary widely from case to case and from state to state. Anyone weighing a real defamation claim, as a plaintiff or a defendant, should consult a lawyer licensed in the relevant jurisdiction rather than relying on how a large media case turned out.

This is general legal information, not legal advice. It summarizes publicly documented litigation and reflects sources verified on June 20, 2026. Court records, settlements, and case statuses change. Consult a lawyer licensed in your jurisdiction about any specific defamation question.

Related articles

• Defamation Laws by State
• World Defamation Laws

---

Last updated: 2026-06-20. We update this page as new defamation cases against Fox News are filed or resolved.