Newsmax has agreed to pay $67 million to settle a defamation lawsuit brought by a voting-equipment company over false claims about the 2020 election. The Monday announcement places the conservative channel among a growing list of media outlets facing steep financial consequences for airing baseless fraud allegations.
Conservative network Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

Key Takeaways:
- Newsmax will pay $67 million to settle a defamation lawsuit.
- The suit alleged the network defamed a voting-machine company with false 2020 election claims.
- The agreement was announced on a Monday.
- The settlement follows a similar high-profile case involving Fox News.
- The payout underscores the mounting legal costs of broadcasting election disinformation.
A Costly Settlement
Newsmax, the conservative television network, said Monday it would pay $67 million to resolve a defamation lawsuit accusing it of “spreading lies about President Donald Trump’s 2020 election loss.” The sizable payout places the channel among the few media organizations to face an eight-figure penalty for on-air statements since the election.
The Lawsuit
The voting-equipment company behind the suit argued that Newsmax’s coverage falsely suggested its technology helped swing the 2020 contest away from Trump. By amplifying those claims, the company alleged, the network damaged its reputation and business.
Financial Stakes
Defamation settlements of this magnitude are rare in American media law. The $67 million figure signals how expensive election-related misinformation has become for broadcasters that failed to vet the claims they aired.
Echoes of Fox News
“The settlement announced Monday comes after Fox News,” the Associated Press reported, noting an earlier resolution in which Fox faced similar allegations of defaming a voting-technology firm. Together, the cases highlight a broader reckoning across conservative media over the 2020 election narrative.
Looking Ahead
With Newsmax now counting the cost, legal observers say more outlets could face courtroom scrutiny of election coverage that strayed from verified facts. The latest agreement reinforces a simple lesson: repeating unfounded claims can carry a steep—and very public—price.