A federal judge has let President Trump’s $10 billion lawsuit against the BBC go forward, because he found Trump made a believable case that the network’s edit of his Jan. 6 speech changed what he said.
Story Highlights
- Judge Jeffrey Kuntz refused to throw out Trump’s core defamation claim against the BBC.
- The suit says a Panorama program joined two parts of Trump’s Jan. 6, 2021 speech, given 55 minutes apart, and cut his call for peace.
- The BBC has apologized for the edit but denies it defamed Trump, and says it is “confident in our position.”
- The case moves into evidence gathering, and Trump faces a deposition, which is sworn questioning by the other side’s lawyers.
Judge Keeps Trump’s Case Alive
On Tuesday, November 10, U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Kuntz in Miami denied the British Broadcasting Corporation’s motion to dismiss Trump’s defamation claim. A motion to dismiss is a request to end a case before any evidence is gathered. Defamation means a false statement of fact that harms someone’s reputation. The judge found that Trump’s complaint plausibly alleged the BBC acted with “actual malice,” the high bar a public figure must clear. The order granted the BBC’s motion only in part, and reports say a second, smaller claim in the suit was dismissed.
The ruling does not decide who wins. The judge wrote that “whether President Trump can prove these claims” is “left for another day.” That question will come at a later stage, either before or at trial.
The Edit At The Heart Of The Case
The fight is over an episode of Panorama, the BBC’s flagship news program, that aired one week before the 2024 election. Trump’s lawyers say the program took two clips of his Jan. 6, 2021 speech that were 55 minutes apart and joined them. They say the edit made it look like one statement urging supporters to march with him and fight, and that it left out “his statement calling for peace.” The suit says the BBC set out to “intentionally and maliciously” mislead its viewers.
The judge pointed to that gap in time. He wrote that the distance between the two remarks supports “a plausible inference that BBC knew or should have known” the segment “would not and could not have been a truthful statement.”
What The BBC Argued
The BBC asked the court to toss the case on several grounds. It said a Florida court has no power over a program made for British viewers that “was never aired anywhere in the US, including the state of Florida.” It said a few Florida viewers who got around its blocks with a VPN, a tool that hides where a viewer is, could not give the court that power. It also argued that Trump could not show harm to his reputation, since he won reelection and carried Florida after the program aired.
In November 2025, the BBC apologized to Trump. It admitted the edit gave “the mistaken impression that President Trump had made a direct call for violent action.” But it said, “we strongly disagree there is a basis for a defamation claim.” After the ruling, the BBC said it was “surprised by this decision but respect[s] the Court’s authority,” and that it remains “confident in our position.”
What Happens Next
The case moves to discovery, the stage where each side must hand over records and answer questions under oath. On October 22, a federal judge in Miami ordered Trump to sit for a deposition with BBC lawyers by December 11, unless the deadline is extended. Trump has said he will be available in the second or third week of January, according to the BBC.
Trump celebrated on Truth Social, calling the ruling “A Huge Victory against Fake News BBC, a terrible abuser of the truth.” For readers who have long watched short clips shape big stories, the case is a test of a simple idea: an edit that changes what a man said can carry a price. A jury, or the judge at a later stage, will decide whether this one does.
Sources:
cbsnews.com, bbc.com, courtlistener.com, washingtonexaminer.com, whitehouse.gov
