Judge’s Ruling Sets Stage For Trial In Smartmatic’s Defamation Case Against Newsmax Over 2020 Election Rigging Claims

A Delaware judge said that a jury will have to decide whether Newsmax engaged in actual malice against Smartmatic as the conservative news outlet amplified claims made by allies of Donald Trump that the voting machine company helped rig the 2020 presidential election.

The ruling from Judge Eric M. Davis is just the latest in a series of lawsuits filed by Smartmatic and another election systems company, Dominion Voting Systems, over claims made by Newsmax, One America News Network and Fox News guests and personalities in the aftermath of the election.

More from Deadline

Smartmatic sued Newsmax in November, 2021, claiming that as the network sought a larger audience, it published dozens of reports indicating that Smartmatic was in a “criminal conspiracy” to rig the results of the election, “and that its technology and software were used to switch votes from former President Trump to now President Biden.”

In his ruling, Davis wrote that “there remains a dispute as to whether Newsmax recklessly disregarded the truth. On one hand, Newsmax argues it was simply reporting matter on a public concern and it had no duty to conduct its own investigation. On the other hand, Smartmatic believes Newsmax reported the allegations knowing they were false.”

The judge added, “The jury must determine if Newsmax was doing what media organizations typically do—inform the public of newsworthy events—or did Newsmax purposely avoid the truth and defame Smartmatic.”

Davis also ruled that the “statements regarding Smartmatic software or voting machines altering the results of the Election are factually false. The reports and investigations conducted by multiple state and federal agencies since the Election universally come to the same result.”

Smartmatic did not provide any election machine software outside of Los Angeles during the cycle, Davis noted.

Among other things, the judge cited internal emails, including those from Newsmax host Bob Sellers and producer Jerry Burke.

“How long are we going to have to play along with election fraud?” Sellers wrote on Nov. 13, “So the election official, who did his job and is assuring Americans that their votes are valid, will get fired because Trump’s narrative is that there was widespread fraud, for which there is no evidence.”

A trial is scheduled to begin on Sept. 30.

Read the Newsmax opinion.

In his ruling, the judge rejected Smartmatic’s claims that it was defamed by statements made on Newsmax about its prior history in Venezuela.

Davis wrote, “Smartmatic fails to explain how the statements concerning its history in Venezuela is materially false nor has Smartmatic proven it is false. Venezuelan government financing agencies invested over $200,000 into a smaller company owned by some of the same owners as Smartmatic. Scholarly studies conducted by Harvard University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology found the Venezuelan election was compromised.”

The judge added, “The statements regarding Smartmatic and its ties to Venezuela are substantially true or present a triable issue of fact; and there has been reporting on the same in the United States as early as 2006 when Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney first raised concerns.”

In August, a federal grand jury in Florida indicted Smartmatic executives on allegations related to a bribery scheme in the Philippines. Smartmatic said that the employees indicted were placed on leave. “No voter fraud has been alleged and Smartmatic is not indicted,” the company said.

Davis also ruled that the jury would have to decide whether Newsmax’s coverage of the aftermath of the election was protected by the neutral reporting privilege. He cited, among other things, a clip in which Newsmax personality Greg Kelly is interviewing Sidney Powell, one of the leading purveyors of the claim that the election was rigged.

“We have so much evidence I feel like it’s coming in through a firehose,” Powell said in one clip.

Kelly responded, “I believe her and I don’t believe the critics and the naysayers. Why? Because quite frankly, they don’t deserve credibility anymore.”

Davis wrote, “A jury could easily find that such a statement is not neutral or disinterested.”

He also ruled that a jury will have to decide whether Newsmax was protected by a Florida fair reporting privilege as one of its correspondents, Emerald Robinson, as she reported on an affidavit in which a whistleblower claimed to have “firsthand experience of manipulating vote software called Smartmatic in the 2013 presidential election” in Venezuela. Smartmatic, though, noted that the affidavit, filed with a Georgia lawsuit by Trump allies, was not sworn or signed.

“Ms. Robinson reported the affidavits were sworn when they were not,” Davis wrote. “A reasonable jury could find Ms. Robinson’s misstatement was material so the fair report privilege may not apply. Conversely, a reasonable jury could find that because the contents were read accurately, the fact that the affidavit is sworn or unsworn is immaterial.”

The judge also rejected Smartmatic’s contention that Newsmax was guilty of “express malice,” where the primary intent of publishing the statement was to injure a plaintiff. Davis found that there “is no evidence that Newsmax acted with evil intent towards Smartmatic or that Newsmax’s proceeded with the intention to hurt Smartmatic. The record is devoid of facts showing that Newsmax harbored any evil or a motive arising from spite or ill as to Smartmatic.” He cited a November, 2020 email that Newsmax CEO Chris Ruddy sent to hosts and producers in which he “makes it clear to his staff that ‘Newsmax cannot project Biden the winner because Pres. Trump is contesting the election. . .’ and he believes ‘the President has a right to have a recount or review of these votes.'”

Erik Connolly, Smartmatic’s lead trial attorney, said in a statement, “Today’s ruling vindicates our position. As we have said before, Newsmax’s own people knew they had no proof that Smartmatic was involved in any type of fraud involving the 2020 election, and yet they continued to peddle that false narrative. Newsmax must be held accountable to the fullest extent under law. We look forward to going to trial and presenting our case.”

In a statement, Newsmax said, “While Newsmax is disappointed that any part of Smartmatic’s lawsuit is going to trial as we believe it is a threat to a free press, we are pleased that the Court found no evidence that Newsmax acted with evil intent toward Smartmatic and that the neutral and fair reporting privileges are available to Newsmax at trial.”

Newsmax also noted that Davis cited Smartmatic controversies in Venezuela and the Philippines.

“The DOJ alleged Smartmatic executives engaged in money laundering and allegedly bribed an election official,” Newsmax said.

“Smartmatic can hardly claim that Newsmax’s coverage harmed its reputation. This case is not about the left versus right, but about a free press being allowed to do its job.”

Davis also presided over Dominion’s defamation lawsuit against Fox News. Just as the case was about to go to trial, the network settled the litigation for $787.5 million.

Best of Deadline

Sign up for Deadline's Newsletter. For the latest news, follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.