Dover, Del. — In a significant legal clash stemming from the 2020 presidential elections, Smartmatic, an electronic voting machine manufacturer, has initiated legal action against conservative cable network Newsmax, based on allegations of the latter disseminating defamatory content which suggested vote tampering. The lawsuit now seems poised for courtroom proceedings after a Delaware judge indicated that various points of contention must be settled by a jury.
Smartmatic, headquartered in Florida, has accused Newsmax and some of its contributors of spuriously implicating the company in electoral rigging, specifically alleging that its software was manipulated to switch voter preferences. Newsmax has defended its broadcasts, stating that the discussions, which featured notable figures such as Rudy Giuliani and Sydney Powell, simply covered significant charges made by former President Donald Trump and his allies.
During the judicial process, both parties sought a resolution in their favor without trial. However, Judge Eric Davis, presiding over the case, granted partial summary judgments to both sides but emphasized that a jury must address pivotal issues. The trial is scheduled to commence on September 30.
Judge Davis affirmed that allegations about Smartmatic’s software altering election results were factually incorrect, emphasizing that Smartmatic’s equipment was only utilized in Los Angeles during the 2020 elections and not anywhere else. However, the judge noted that claims relating to Smartmatic’s alleged connections with Venezuelan political figures were not conclusively disproven.
In recent developments, court documents released last month brought to light a federal grand jury indictment involving three Smartmatic executives. The charges allege a bribery scheme exceeding $1 million intended to secure contracts for voting machines in the Philippines. The indictment claims Roger Piñate, a co-founder of Smartmatic, was centrally involved in these operations.
While Newsmax faced a setback with these serious allegations against Smartmatic, the network gained a favorable judgment regarding the absence of express malice in its reporting. Judge Davis stated there was no substantial evidence suggesting Newsmax’s intent was to harm Smartmatic’s reputation.
Moreover, the judge’s prior decision stated that Smartmatic must prove that Newsmax broadcasted misleading information with actual malice — knowing it to be false — given that Smartmatic is considered a limited public figure for defamation purposes.
Furthermore, Newsmax may invoke protection under Florida’s “neutral reporting privilege,” arguing that its coverage merely presented content from third-party sources without endorsement. The network also seeks to assert a “fair reporting privilege” concerning reports on whistleblower affidavits by their White House correspondent, despite challenges over the affidavits’ authenticity.
The lawsuit is one among various legal actions triggered by accusations against election technology firms post-2020 elections. Smartmatic is also pursuing a defamation lawsuit against Fox News in New York and has settled a previous lawsuit with One America News Network in Washington, D.C. Similarly, Dominion Voting Systems has filed lawsuits related to similar conspiracy theories linked to the election.
In a parallel and notable case that saw media coverage last year, Fox News reached a substantial settlement with Dominion Voting Systems, under Judge Davis’s overview, wherein the media giant agreed to pay $787 million.
As this case unfolds, it presents another crucial moment for judicial scrutiny on the responsibility of media networks in disseminating allegations concerning public electoral processes, setting a potential precedent for future legal standards in election-related reporting.