Dominion argues Fox News aired the falsehoods about electoral machines while knowing they were untrue Case could have a significant impact on the future of defamation law, media industry WILMINGTON: Opening arguments begin Tuesday in a major defamation trial against Fox News that tests the extent of free speech rights for media in America — even when broadcasting election falsehoods. Dominion Voting Systems is suing Fox News for $1.6 billion, alleging the conservative network promoted Donald Trump’s baseless claim that its machines were used to rig the 2020 presidential election that he lost to Joe Biden. Dominion argues that Fox News aired the falsehoods while knowing they were untrue. The highly anticipated trial, the start of which was postponed by a day amid reports the network is seeking a settlement, could become one of the most consequential libel cases ever heard in the United States. Jury selection resumed inside the Delaware Superior Court in Wilmington around 9:00 am (1300 GMT), with opening arguments expected later in the day. A long line of reporters and members of the public queued to get into the courthouse. One anti-Fox protester held a sign that read “Fox is guilty” and “Make ‘em pay.” The trial threatens reputational and financial damage for Rupert Murdoch’s 24-hour news behemoth and the media titan himself who is expected to be called to testify. Dominion says the network began endorsing Trump’s conspiracy because the channel was losing its audience after it became the first television outlet to call the southwestern state of Arizona for Biden, effectively projecting the Democrat would win the presidency. Fox News denies defamation. It claims it was only reporting on Trump’s allegations, not supporting them, and is protected by free speech rights enshrined in the First Amendment of the US Constitution. The protection makes it difficult for plaintiffs to win defamation suits in the United States. In pre-trial hearings, Delaware judge Eric Davis ruled that there was no question Fox aired false statements about Dominion. For Dominion to win however, it would have to prove Fox News acted with actual malice, a tough burden to meet and a bedrock of US media law since 1964. Fox News employs some traditional news reporters, but the majority of its airtime is given to commentators, including in the several highly watched prime-time shows hosted by conservative thought leaders. Some experts believe that the outcome of the Dominion v. Fox News case could have a significant impact on the future of defamation law and the media industry. If Dominion is successful in its lawsuit, it could set a precedent that would make it easier for accusers to hold news organizations accountable for defamatory statements. On the other hand, if Fox News is victorious, it could make it much more difficult for accusers to win defamation cases against news organizations. Dominion’s lawsuit has already proved embarrassing to Fox. The Murdoch-owned Wall Street Journal has reported that the channel is exploring ways to settle the case. A settlement would mean 92-year-old Murdoch and star anchors, such as Tucker Carlson, would avoid having to take the witness stand in court. Murdoch admitted in a deposition in the case that some on-air hosts had “endorsed” the false claim that the 2020 election was stolen from Trump. But he denied that the network in its entirety had pushed the lie, according to court documents filed by Dominion in February. A separate filing showed Murdoch had described comments by former Trump advisers Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell pushing Trump’s claims as “really crazy stuff. And damaging.” Dominion’s lawyers also released a trove of internal Fox News communications in which some commentators expressed a dislike of Trump, despite praising him on air. “I hate him passionately,” Carlson said of the ex-president after his election loss. Fox News has accused Dominion of “cherry-picking and taking quotes out of context.” With agencies