A blow to Fox, Dominion and Rupert Murdoch in the 2020 presidential election: a state-of-the-art analysis

This outcome is a blow to Fox, which tried to block Dominion from forcing the Murdochs onto the witness stand. The judge signaled at previous hearings that he was skeptical of Fox’s claims that their testimony wasn’t necessary. The judge’s comments Wednesday further raise the stakes for Fox in the closely watched case, which is set to go to trial this month, barring a last-minute settlement.

“They are relevant to the case… if Dominion wants to bring them live, they need to issue a trial subpoena, and I would not quash it,” Davis said. He stated that he would have the final say on the location of the trial, which is scheduled to begin in Delaware later this month.

Fox’s motions attempt to narrow the legal approach and return focus to the core issues of the case.

Murdoch and other Fox figures were against the Trump camp because they wanted to push claims of election fraud. It was “really bad” that Rudy Giuliani was advising Trump, Rupert Murdoch wrote in an email that was revealed in court filings.

Dominion also argued that references to threats its employees faced in the aftermath of the 2020 are relevant to the case, contending in court filings that it is “evidence that Fox’s lies destroyed Dominion’s reputation and enterprise value.”

Motions in limine filed by Fox and Dominion in a United States Senate District Court on Oct. 28, 2015 (and filed by the same court on Thursday)

The documents made public Thursday are “motions in limine,” which are pretrial efforts by both sides to block certain evidence and arguments from being used during the trial. These motions are common in criminal and civil proceedings. Depending on how the judge rules, the outcome of these motions could significantly shape the trial, potentially giving one side an advantage.

The motions were filed last month but they were not made public. They filed public versions of the documents on Thursday, in accordance with an order from the judge. Media outlets had pressed the judge for more transparency, and to unseal these and other documents.

In the documents, Fox additionally asked the judge to bar references to the company’s financial information and the state of mind of its employees, arguing both were irrelevant to the case.

Dominion’s lawyers argued that the attack on the U.S. Capitol “is central to almost every element of this case, and the Court should reject Fox’s motion in its entirety.”

Death threats, harassment and protests related to the company became incredibly hard for them to retain and win business.