Conservative network Newsmax agrees to pay $67M in defamation case over bogus 2020 election claims

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.

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.

More from World

How does NASA handle astronaut medical issues in space?
"America's Longstanding Quest to Acquire Greenland"
by The National Interest
21 hours ago
2 mins read
A Brief History of the US Trying (and Failing) to Buy Greenland
Protecting New Hampshire's Children From Abuse
by Concord Monitor
1 day ago
2 mins read
Letter: Attention NH legislators
Student Hit by Vehicle En Route to School
by Ksat
1 day ago
1 min read
Northside ISD student hit by vehicle while riding scooter to school, district says
Board Expands Access to Innovative Therapies
by Wv News
1 day ago
1 min read
The Board of Medicine Launches Membership Program Expanding Access to Emerging Medical Knowledge
Vince Hall Leads California CASA's Future
by Wv News
1 day ago
1 min read
California CASA Appoints Vince Hall as New CEO to Lead Statewide Organization
Illinois bill would let families sue over nonconsensual videos of children
Trump's Venezuela Efforts Echo 'Forever Wars'
by Magic Valley
1 day ago
1 min read
Donald Trump’s Venezuela coup seems to be deja vu all over again
Steelers Seek to End Playoff Drought
by Si
1 day ago
1 min read
Steelers vs. Texans Bold Predictions: Playoff Streak Finally Ends
Missoula Health Center Gains Independence
by Missoulian
1 day ago
2 mins read
Partnership Health Center officially becomes an independent nonprofit health center | Lara Salazar
Emporia Renames Room to Honor Evora Wheeler
by Emporiagazette
1 day ago
1 min read
Emporia City Commission names conference room in honor of former Mayor Evora Wheeler
Trump's Venezuela Tactics Divert Domestic Focus
by Missoulian
1 day ago
2 mins read
Letter to the editor: Attack is a diversion