(Bloomberg, Washington) Despite the BBC's apology for its controversial documentary and the subsequent resignations of its top executives, US President Trump continues to threaten to sue the BBC, seeking up to $5 billion (approximately S$6.5 billion) in damages. However, legal experts believe Trump faces numerous legal hurdles in proving he was the victim of deliberate defamation.
"I feel I have to do this," Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One on Friday (November 14).
A BBC documentary titled "Trump: A Second Chance?", which aired a week before last year's US presidential election, misleadingly edited and spliced together clips of Trump's speeches, making it appear as if he was inciting supporters to riot. Trump has stated his intention to sue the BBC for this.
However, this lawsuit faces numerous legal questions. First, it is unclear whether US courts have jurisdiction over the case, as the documentary was never broadcast in the US, and the BBC's streaming service is geo-blocked in the US.
More importantly, Trump must prove that the BBC acted with "actual malice" against him when editing the documentary.
Further Reading
Syracuse University law professor Germain said, "They have to meet the 'actual malice' standard established in The New York Times v. Sullivan, which is a very stringent standard…and Trump is the 'ultimate public figure.'"
The 1964 Sullivan v. Sullivan case is considered a major milestone in American libel law, establishing a high threshold for public figures in libel lawsuits: they must prove "actual malice" in the media, meaning they knowingly published content that might be false. This is an extremely high threshold established by the U.S. Supreme Court to protect free speech and applicable to public figures.
University of Florida law professor Lidsky pointed out that the amount of damages Trump is demanding is completely unrealistic. "He's almost impossible to get close to that amount…he claimed defamation, but then won the presidency."
Fordham University law professor Benzipsky also believes that Trump's lawsuit against the BBC is likely to fail because the Supreme Court has long recognized the importance of not using the threat of litigation to suppress political speech.
