Federal judge dismisses former Trump supporter’s defamation suit against Fox News | US Capitol attack
US politics | The Guardian — 2026-05-09 11:37:00 — www.theguardian.com
Federal Judge Dismisses Defamation Lawsuit Against Fox News
A federal judge has once again dismissed a defamation lawsuit filed by Raymond Epps, a former supporter of Donald Trump, against Fox News. Epps had claimed that the network’s inaccurate portrayal of him as a government operative involved in the January 6, 2021, Capitol attack led to severe personal repercussions, including death threats. This ruling marks the second dismissal of Epps’ claims, with the judge finding insufficient evidence of "actual malice" on the part of Fox News.
Case Background and Judicial Decision
Raymond Epps, who had previously been associated with the far-right Oath Keepers group, alleged that Fox News falsely accused him of inciting violence during the Capitol riot, an accusation that forced him and his wife to sell their Arizona ranch and live in a recreational vehicle to escape harassment. However, Jennifer L. Hall, a Delaware-based U.S. district judge, concluded that Epps failed to demonstrate that Fox News knowingly broadcast false information about him. Despite allowing Epps to amend and refile his lawsuit in 2024, his subsequent submissions did not meet the legal threshold of proving "actual malice," a requisite for defamation cases involving public figures.
Fox News and Tucker Carlson’s Role
The lawsuit specifically pointed to former Fox host Tucker Carlson as a significant proponent of the conspiracy theories about Epps. Carlson, who left Fox News in April 2023, frequently discussed Epps on his show, contributing to the spread of the allegations. Despite these claims, the court found no plausible evidence that Carlson or his team knew the information aired was false or showed a reckless disregard for the truth.
Fox News’ Response
Following the dismissal, Fox News expressed satisfaction with the court’s decision, emphasizing that it preserved the press freedoms protected under the First Amendment. This statement came amidst ongoing discussions about the role of media in spreading misinformation related to political events.
Legal and Political Implications
Epps had previously admitted guilt to a misdemeanor related to the Capitol attack and received a one-year probation sentence. Notably, he was pardoned by Trump along with approximately 1,500 others involved in the incident. Federal prosecutors have supported Epps’ strong denials of any collaboration with the FBI or being planted by the government during the attack.
How This Sits Against Accuracy, Norms, and Governing Rules
Truth and Evidence
The claims about Epps’ involvement in the Capitol attack and his role as a government operative were central to the lawsuit. Normally, such serious allegations would require robust evidence, including independent corroboration or primary documents, which were not sufficiently provided in this case. The judge’s ruling highlighted the lack of evidence indicating that Fox News or Tucker Carlson acted with actual malice or had a reckless disregard for the truth.
What the Excerpt Shows About Verifiable Lies
Based on the information provided, there are no explicit statements from Trump or verifiable lies directly tied to him in the excerpt. The dismissal of the lawsuit primarily hinged on the legal standards of defamation and the inability of Epps to prove actual malice. Additional evidence or testimonies, not included in the excerpt, would be necessary to fully assess the veracity of the claims made by both parties.
Conclusion
The dismissal of Raymond Epps’ defamation lawsuit underscores the complexities of defamation law, especially concerning public figures and media outlets. It also highlights ongoing concerns about the accountability of news organizations in their reporting on sensitive political matters. As this legal battle concludes, it leaves a precedent about the evidentiary standards required for defamation claims against major media players.