Fox News Network LLC has lost its bid to appeal a Delaware judge's refusal to throw out California Gov. Gavin Newsom's $787.5 million defamation lawsuit, meaning the network must now proceed through pretrial discovery in a case that centers on a disputed phone call between Newsom and President Donald Trump. The Supreme Court of Delaware denied Fox News' interlocutory appeal in an order signed by Justice Abigail M. LeGrow, according to the Tampa Free Press.
The court found that Fox News had not met the strict bar required under Delaware Supreme Court Rule 42, which bars appeals before a final trial judgment unless exceptional circumstances show that immediate appellate review outweighs the inefficiency, disruption, and cost of piecemeal litigation, according to Justia Law. The Supreme Court said the potential benefits of interlocutory review did not outweigh the inefficiency, disruption, and probable costs, and concluded the appeal did not meet Rule 42's strict standards, according to the Tampa Free Press. Exceptional circumstances warranting interlocutory review, the court said, do not exist here.
The underlying dispute traces back to a 16-minute phone call between Newsom and Trump on June 6, 2025, as ICE raids in Los Angeles sparked local protests and Trump moved to deploy 2,000 California National Guard troops over Newsom's objections, according to POLITICO. On Fox News, John Roberts described the call as occurring “yesterday or the other day,” and Trump himself told Roberts during a June 10 briefing that he had spoken with Newsom “a day ago,” providing a screenshot of his call log, per the Tampa Free Press. Newsom responded on X that there was “no call. Not even a voicemail,” prompting host Jesse Watters to accuse the governor of lying — a claim Fox flashed on-screen with an alert chyron reading “Gavin Lied About Trump's Call.”
A Call Log, an Edited Clip, and a Retraction Segment
Trump's call log reportedly showed a 16-minute phone call on June 7, 2025, and Jesse Watters Primetime aired an edited video clip of Trump's response that same day — a clip that omitted Trump's “a day ago” comment, according to the Tampa Free Press. Watters later said he interpreted Newsom's social media post as meaning no call had ever taken place at all.
On July 17, 2025, Watters aired a follow-up segment showing the unedited clip of Trump saying he'd spoken to Newsom “a day ago,” but the segment displayed a chyron reading “Gavin Didn't Lie, He Was Just Sloppy” and asserted that Newsom was “confusing and unclear,” the Tampa Free Press reported. Watters said on-air that Newsom “did not deceive anybody on purpose” and advised the governor to “say what he meant next time.” Newsom's legal team later amended the complaint to add details about that segment, alleging Fox News continued its defamatory narrative under the guise of a retraction, according to KQED.
The Path to a $787.5 Million Demand
Newsom filed his complaint in the Superior Court of Delaware on June 27, 2025, alleging defamation per se, and his legal team sent Fox News a formal letter offering to withdraw the lawsuit entirely if the network issued an on-air retraction and Watters delivered an explicit public apology — an offer Fox News rejected, moving instead to dismiss the case as a political publicity stunt, according to KQED. Newsom's original complaint also alleged violations of California's unfair competition law, though the complaint was later amended to remove that count.
The lawsuit's $787.5 million demand explicitly matches the record settlement Fox News agreed to pay Dominion Voting Systems in April 2023 over its 2020 election coverage, according to the Associated Press. That Delaware case, Dominion's suit against Fox News, revealed internal communications showing anchors and executives harbored doubts about claims they were broadcasting — and the Superior Court of Delaware cited US Dominion Inc. v. Fox News Network LLC directly in its ruling, per the Tampa Free Press.
Fox News' Dismissal Arguments Rejected
On April 30, 2026, Judge Sean P. Lugg issued a 43-page decision denying Fox News' motion to dismiss, ruling it was “reasonably conceivable” that the network knowingly aired false statements with actual malice, according to Bloomberg Law. The court held that Newsom had sufficiently stated a defamation claim under California law and rejected Fox's position that Watters' commentary was protected opinion. Because Newsom is a public official, his suit must satisfy the actual malice standard set by the U.S. Supreme Court's 1964 ruling in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, meaning he must prove Fox published false statements knowing they were false or with reckless disregard for the truth, per the Straits Times.
Fox News had argued the complaint failed to state a defamation claim under California law and that Newsom missed statutory timing rules under California Civil Code § 48a, which requires libel plaintiffs to serve a written correction demand within 20 days of learning of the publication. Judge Lugg rejected that argument, and on June 8, 2026, the Superior Court of Delaware again rejected Fox's arguments concerning the statutory timing issue when it denied Fox's certification request for appeal. The court also rejected Fox's claim that litigating in Delaware would present a substantial hardship, dismissing that forum-shopping argument under what are known as the Cryo-Maid legal factors.
Why the Case Landed in Delaware
Delaware has become a favored venue for high-profile defamation suits because corporations like Fox Corp are incorporated there, satisfying personal jurisdiction requirements, and because the state's procedural rules make it attractive to plaintiffs, according to Ballard Spahr. That same jurisdictional logic drove Dominion's landmark suit against the network. The Superior Court of Delaware said that allowing interlocutory appeals from routine motion-to-dismiss denials would create unnecessary disruptions to the litigation process.
The National Guard dispute that sparked the original phone call was itself the subject of separate litigation: U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer issued an emergency temporary restraining order on June 12, 2025, blocking Trump's federalization and deployment of the California National Guard in Los Angeles, according to KQED. Newsom announced that court victory outside the California State Supreme Court building.
With the interlocutory appeal denied, Newsom's defamation suit now proceeds in the Superior Court of Delaware toward full pretrial discovery, a phase that will require Fox News anchors and executives to sit for depositions and turn over internal communications about how the segments and chyrons at issue were produced.
