The folks at One America News Network better start saving their pennies! The conservative news network is being sued by Dominion Voting Systems for defamatory lies about the election, to the tune of $1.6 billion, an amount at least five times what the entire company is worth.
And before OANN onanists can even pay their lawyers to fend off Thomas Clare, they’ll have to cut a $250,000 check to Ted Boutros, plus whatever Gibson Dunn charged NBC to fend off the latest appeal in a garbage SLAPP suit OAN filed in 2019 against Rachel Maddow.
In November of 2019, the MSNBC host discussed a recent Daily Beast article entitled Trump’s New Favorite Channel Employs Kremlin-Paid Journalist. Which, in fact, it did.
AI Built for Litigation. Verified by Design.
Grounded in authoritative content and verified at every step, Protégé is the only legal AI tool that delivers work you can trust—without exception.
OANN personality Kristian Rouz, who voiced support for QAnon, suggested that Hillary Clinton is funding Antifa, and linked George Soros, Bill Gates, and Hillary Clinton to “globalist conspiracy to establish sweeping population control” through the coronavirus, was also getting paid by the Russian propaganda outlet Sputnik to churn out freelance articles for $40 a pop.
“In this case, the most obsequiously pro-Trump right wing news outlet in America really literally is paid Russian propaganda,” Maddow quipped. “Their on air U.S. politics reporter is paid by the Russian government to produce propaganda for that government.”
This was the gravamen of OANN’s defamation allegation, for which those glass house dwellers demanded $10 million in damages to make them whole. Because they really have some stones.
The trial court found the claim without merit, ruling that it was clearly a statement of opinion, granting the defendants’ motion to strike under California’s SLAPP statute, and awarding attorneys fees to MSNBC.
AI Is Reshaping Legal Practice—But Tools Aren’t The Real Differentiator.
Explore the mindset, cultural shifts, and training strategies that define the AI‑savvy lawyer, revealing why human judgment, standardized competence, and integrated learning—not technology alone—will shape the future of the profession.
For reasons unclear, OANN then trotted off to try their hand at the Ninth Circuit, where they got exactly the same result.
We agree with the district court’s conclusion that the broad context of Maddow’s show makes it more likely that her audiences will “expect her to use subjective language that comports with her political opinions.” Herring Networks, 445 F. Supp. 3d at 1050. It seems Herring agrees with this conclusion as well: Herring’s complaint characterizes Maddow as “a liberal television host,” and MSNBC’s cable programming as “liberal politics.” Although MSNBC produces news, Maddow’s show in particular is more than just stating the news—Maddow “is invited and encouraged to share her opinions with her viewers.” Id. at 1049. In turn, Maddow’s audience anticipates her effort “to persuade others to [her] position[] by use of epithets, fiery rhetoric or hyperbole.”
And indeed the appellate court was not impressed with OANN’s bellyaching that the trial judge improperly refused to consider additional evidence consisting of “(1) transcripts from some of Maddow’s other shows; (2) an article in The New York Times Magazine about Maddow and her show; (3) an anonymous online comment submitted to OAN; (4) a linguistic expert’s report; and (5) a statement made by Chris Matthews on an episode of HardBall.”
Not just because LOL, the comments section, AYFKMRN? But also because, if your complaint is deficient, the normal remedy is to file an amendment — which the plaintiffs failed to do. So now, OANN can pay lawyers for both sides of this preposterous appeal.
Bang up job, everyone! Can’t wait to see how y’all handle that Dominion suit.
Herring Networks Inc. v. Maddow [Trial Docket via Court Listener]
Herring Networks Inc. v. Maddow [Appellate Opinion]
Elizabeth Dye lives in Baltimore where she writes about law and politics.