Connect with us

News

Voting-tech company settles with right-wing network over false election claims

Published

on

Voting-tech company settles with right-wing network over false election claims

News anchors work at Newsmax’s booth during the 2024 Republican National Convention in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The network has settled with voting-tech company Smartmatic, which accused it of defamation following the 2020 presidential election.

PATRICK T. FALLON/AFP via Getty Images/AFP


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

PATRICK T. FALLON/AFP via Getty Images/AFP

Once more, a voting tech company has settled its defamation lawsuit over false allegations of voter fraud in the 2020 presidential election before the start of trial — in this instance, Smartmatic USA’s suit against the conservative network Newsmax.

Thursday’s settlement occurred during the jury selection process. A four-week trial was scheduled to begin in Delaware on Monday.

Neither side made details of the settlement public.

Advertisement

Smartmatic emailed a statement saying it is “very pleased to have secured the completion of the case against Newsmax.” The statement said Smartmatic is now shifting gears to focus on its related suits against Fox News and Fox Corp.

“Lying to the American people has consequences,” the company’s statement said. “Smartmatic will not stop until the perpetrators are held accountable.”

Lawsuits stemming from 2020 election continue

The case is just one in a flurry of lawsuits surrounding false claims about fraud in the 2020 election. In 2023, on the eve of opening arguments, Dominion Voting Systems settled a defamation case against Fox News for $787.5 million.

Dominion also is suing Newsmax in Delaware Superior Court, while Smartmatic is pursuing a case against Fox News in New York.

Smartmatic also settled a similar case against One America News Network earlier this year. The details of that settlement also remain confidential.

Advertisement

Two defamation cases overseen by the same judge

The size of Fox’s record settlement spoke to the gravity of the recurring false claims by the network about Dominion. The presiding judge, Eric M. Davis, had already ruled that Fox News had knowingly and repeatedly defamed Dominion before the settlement. The only question before the jury was to determine actual and punitive damages.

Davis also oversaw the Smartmatic case against Newsmax. He earlier ruled that Smartmatic could not seek punitive damages beyond any direct losses it could show as a result of being defamed. “There is no evidence that Newsmax acted with evil intent towards Smartmatic,” the judge wrote.

Much like Dominion’s case against Fox, Smartmatic’s case against Newsmax centered on false statements made on dozens of television segments in late 2020 in which hosts, producers and guests linked the voting machine company to vote-switching conspiracy theories.

Smartmatic operated only in Los Angeles County during the 2020 elections. No fraud was alleged there. Given California’s strong Democratic tilt, no influence could have affected the broader outcome.

The network’s guests and hosts embraced allegations that Smartmatic software flipped votes during the election that year.

Advertisement

Among the offending segments: Newsmax hosts replayed exchanges from Fox News amplifying conspiracy theories about election fraud promoted by Trump legal adviser Sidney Powell. Newsmax’s Greg Kelly told viewers, “I believe her, and I don’t believe the critics.” Powell was sanctioned by a federal judge in 2021 and subsequently pleaded guilty to election interference in Georgia in 2023.

By late 2020, Newsmax started airing a disclaimer that no evidence linked Dominion or Smartmatic to the manipulation of votes and disavowed other related conspiracy theories. The next year, it broadcast an apology and a retraction to claims about a Dominion employee who faced death threats.

Looming indictments

In legal filings, Newsmax denied that it engaged in any defamatory action toward Smartmatic.

Even so, the further unspooling of its defense strategy may have proven embarrassing for Newsmax. In a day-long pre-trial hearing earlier this month, the network’s lawyers indicated that some of its litigation strategy may have relied on the argument that producers at the cable news channel didn’t didn’t realize Smartmatic and Dominion were two separate companies. The legal briefs also signaled that Newsmax’s on-air personalities weren’t subject to its journalistic standards because those guidelines governed its “writing” more than its broadcasts.

Even before Davis nixed the possibility of punitive damages, there was also some legal sparring over Smartmatic’s changing estimates of how much it was worth. Lawyers acknowledged a “$1 billion swing” in its proposed valuation.

Advertisement

Smartmatic had also received a public black eye this summer with the revelation that federal authorities had indicted several company officials, including its president, for a bribery scheme in the Philippines. Davis had ruled that Newsmax would be allowed to present some evidence about that issue in its defense during trial.

Those developments made the odds more daunting that a trial would yield greater results for Smartmatic than a settlement. And they could come into play in the New York trial against Fox as well.

“Smartmatic unsurprisingly chose to settle its case with Newsmax on the eve of trial after a series of major setbacks devastated its case,” a spokesperson for Fox News Media said in a statement Thursday evening. “Smartmatic’s claims against Fox are similarly impaired, unsupported by the facts and intended to chill First Amendment freedoms.”

The network said it was looking forward to defending its case in court.

Advertisement

News

Video: F.A.A. Ignored Safety Concerns Prior to Collision Over Potomac, N.T.S.B. Says

Published

on

Video: F.A.A. Ignored Safety Concerns Prior to Collision Over Potomac, N.T.S.B. Says

new video loaded: F.A.A. Ignored Safety Concerns Prior to Collision Over Potomac, N.T.S.B. Says

transcript

transcript

F.A.A. Ignored Safety Concerns Prior to Collision Over Potomac, N.T.S.B. Says

The National Transportation Safety Board said that a “multitude of errors” led to the collision between a military helicopter and a commercial jet, killing 67 people last January.

“I imagine there will be some difficult moments today for all of us as we try to provide answers to how a multitude of errors led to this tragedy.” “We have an entire tower who took it upon themselves to try to raise concerns over and over and over and over again, only to get squashed by management and everybody above them within F.A.A. Were they set up for failure?” “They were not adequately prepared to do the jobs they were assigned to do.”

Advertisement
The National Transportation Safety Board said that a “multitude of errors” led to the collision between a military helicopter and a commercial jet, killing 67 people last January.

By Meg Felling

January 27, 2026

Continue Reading

News

Families of killed men file first U.S. federal lawsuit over drug boat strikes

Published

on

Families of killed men file first U.S. federal lawsuit over drug boat strikes

President Trump speaks as U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth looks on during a meeting of his Cabinet at the White House in December 2025.

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Relatives of two Trinidadian men killed in an airstrike last October are suing the U.S. government for wrongful death and for carrying out extrajudicial killings.

The case, filed in Massachusetts, is the first lawsuit over the strikes to land in a U.S. federal court since the Trump administration launched a campaign to target vessels off the coast of Venezuela. The American government has carried out three dozen such strikes since September, killing more than 100 people.

Among them are Chad Joseph, 26, and Rishi Samaroo, 41, who relatives say died in what President Trump described as “a lethal kinetic strike” on Oct. 14, 2025. The president posted a short video that day on social media that shows a missile targeting a ship, which erupts in flame.

Advertisement

“This is killing for sport, it’s killing for theater and it’s utterly lawless,” said Baher Azmy, legal director of the Center for Constitutional Rights. “We need a court of law to rein in this administration and provide some accountability to the families.”

The White House and Pentagon justify the strikes as part of a broader push to stop the flow of illegal drugs into the U.S. The Pentagon declined to comment on the lawsuit, saying it doesn’t comment on ongoing litigation.

But the new lawsuit described Joseph and Samaroo as fishermen doing farm work in Venezuela, with no ties to the drug trade. Court papers said they were headed home to family members when the strike occurred and now are presumed dead.

Neither man “presented a concrete, specific, and imminent threat of death or serious physical injury to the United States or anyone at all, and means other than lethal force could have reasonably been employed to neutralize any lesser threat,” according to the lawsuit.

Advertisement

Lenore Burnley, the mother of Chad Joseph, and Sallycar Korasingh, the sister of Rishi Samaroo, are the plaintiffs in the case.

Their court papers allege violations of the Death on the High Seas Act, a 1920 law that makes the U.S. government liable if its agents engage in negligence that results in wrongful death more than 3 miles off American shores. A second claim alleges violations of the Alien Tort Statute, which allows foreign citizens to sue over human rights violations such as deaths that occurred outside an armed conflict, with no judicial process.

The American Civil Liberties Union, the Center for Constitutional Rights, and Jonathan Hafetz at Seton Hall University School of Law are representing the plaintiffs.

“In seeking justice for the senseless killing of their loved ones, our clients are bravely demanding accountability for their devastating losses and standing up against the administration’s assault on the rule of law,” said Brett Max Kaufman, senior counsel at the ACLU.

U.S. lawmakers have raised questions about the legal basis for the strikes for months but the administration has persisted.

Advertisement

—NPR’s Quil Lawrence contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

News

Video: New Video Analysis Reveals Flawed and Fatal Decisions in Shooting of Pretti

Published

on

Video: New Video Analysis Reveals Flawed and Fatal Decisions in Shooting of Pretti

new video loaded: New Video Analysis Reveals Flawed and Fatal Decisions in Shooting of Pretti

A frame-by-frame assessment of actions by Alex Pretti and the two officers who fired 10 times shows how lethal force came to be used against a target who didn’t pose a threat.

By Devon Lum, Haley Willis, Alexander Cardia, Dmitriy Khavin and Ainara Tiefenthäler

January 26, 2026

Continue Reading

Trending