In a significant development, a Delaware judge has ruled that Smartmatic’s defamation lawsuit against Newsmax will proceed to trial. This ruling follows allegations that Newsmax broadcast false claims implying Smartmatic manipulated the 2020 presidential election results.
Smartmatic, a Florida-based voting machine company, claims that Newsmax, along with other conservative media outlets, falsely suggested the company was involved in election fraud. Newsmax contends that it was simply reporting on allegations made by former President Trump and his allies, though it has since admitted that some claims about Smartmatic were not verified.
Despite both parties seeking a summary judgment to avoid trial, Superior Court Judge Eric Davis has decided that a jury will determine the outcome of critical issues. The trial is set to begin on September 30, according to The Associated Press.
Smartmatic asserts that its role in the 2020 election was limited to providing equipment and software in Los Angeles, not in the contested areas. This lawsuit follows a similar action against One America News Network (OANN), which was resolved in April through a confidential settlement. Smartmatic’s defamation case against Fox News remains ongoing.
Judge Davis has ruled that not all of Newsmax’s statements about Smartmatic were materially false, allowing Newsmax to contest claims related to the company’s Venezuelan connections. Additionally, a federal grand jury in Florida has indicted three Smartmatic executives in a separate $1 million scheme involving voting machines in the Philippines, a detail Newsmax highlighted in court documents.
Davis classified Smartmatic as a “limited public figure,” requiring the company to prove that Newsmax acted with “actual malice”—i.e., with deliberate disregard for the truth. The judge also noted that Newsmax could claim a “neutral reporting privilege,” arguing that its statements were based on third-party claims rather than Newsmax’s own assertions.
Nevertheless, Davis found no evidence that Newsmax acted with “evil intent,” leaving the jury to decide if Smartmatic is entitled to damages and if Newsmax’s actions constituted actual malice. Smartmatic is eager to present its case to the jury, although Newsmax may seek a settlement to avoid a trial.
In a statement, Smartmatic expressed readiness to demonstrate the damages it has suffered. “We look forward to proving our case to a jury,” said Erik Connolly, Smartmatic’s lead trial attorney. “This decision marks another step forward in our fight against the defamation we endured following the 2020 election.”
Newsmax, for its part, maintains it did not make any false claims about Smartmatic. The company has criticized the court’s decision as a threat to press freedom but welcomed the judge’s finding that there was no proof of malicious intent. Spokesperson Bill Daddi commented, “We are disappointed that Smartmatic’s lawsuit will proceed to trial but are pleased that the court recognized Newsmax’s right to report on newsworthy allegations and the absence of evil intent.”
