ع
US District Judge Jeffrey Kuntz determined that President Donald Trump had plausibly alleged the BBC defamed him in a documentary aired shortly before the 2024 presidential election. The ruling on Tuesday denied the broadcaster’s motion to dismiss the core defamation claim in the suit filed in Florida federal court while throwing out the unfair trade practices portion. Kuntz wrote that whether Trump can prove the allegations and resulting damages would be left for summary judgment or trial and the decision comes after months of pretrial disputes including orders for his deposition.
Trump’s lawsuit centers on a 12-second edited segment from his January 6 2021 speech that the BBC used in its Panorama program titled Trump: A Second Chance. The clip spliced his remarks urging supporters to march to the Capitol and to fight like hell while omitting language in which he called for them to act peacefully and patriotically. Reuters reported that the broadcaster admitted the edits created a misleading impression and issued an apology to Trump even as it denies any legal liability for defamation.
The documentary triggered an internal crisis at the BBC after a leaked memo cited the editing as potential evidence of political bias. That development led to the resignations of the broadcaster’s director general and its head of news according to accounts in The Guardian and Bloomberg. A BBC spokesperson said the organization was surprised by the court’s decision but respected the authority and would continue defending through the legal process adding that it remained confident in its position.
Trump hailed the ruling as a huge victory in a Truth Social post on Tuesday. He stated that his team would continue fighting against and defeating all of those who try to deceive the American people. The president originally filed the lawsuit in December 2025 seeking $5 billion in damages for defamation and another $5 billion on the now-dismissed trade practices count.
In his order Kuntz noted the time disparity between the spliced statements supported an inference that the BBC knew or should have known the resulting segment was not truthful. The judge observed that the broadcaster had possessed the full unedited speech for nearly three years before producing the documentary. As a public figure Trump will need to establish actual malice under longstanding legal standards and demonstrate actual damages from the program which was not broadcast in Florida but available through streaming platforms.
The case represents one element of a wider set of legal actions Trump has pursued against media outlets over coverage he views as unfair according to Reuters. Court filings reviewed in the order distinguished this matter from Trump’s earlier dismissed suits against CNN and the Wall Street Journal because the BBC had created the contested content through editing rather than reporting on external claims. Earlier proceedings included a magistrate judge ordering Trump to sit for a deposition by December 11 and separate rulings on attempts to access his financial records.
