US judge lets Trump's $10bn defamation suit against BBC go ahead

A ruling that keeps the suit alive

A federal judge in Florida ruled on Tuesday, 10 November 2026, that Donald Trump's defamation lawsuit against the BBC can proceed. Judge Jeffrey Kuntz denied the broadcaster's request to dismiss the defamation claim in the $10bn (£7.5bn) suit, which Trump filed in Florida. The judge did not rule on the merits and left open whether Trump can prove his claims at summary judgment or at trial. Trump called the decision a "huge victory" in a Truth Social post. The BBC said it was surprised by the decision but respects the court's authority.

“Whether President Trump can prove these claims and establish he sustained damages at summary judgment or trial is left for another day.”

“We are surprised by this decision but respect the Court's authority and note the case will now proceed to the next stage.”

The edit at the centre of the case

The suit concerns an episode of the BBC's Panorama documentary, titled Trump: A Second Chance, which edited together two sections of a speech Trump gave on 6 January 2021 outside the US Capitol. Judge Kuntz noted that the spliced comments were nearly 55 minutes apart in the speech. The BBC has apologised, saying the broadcast gave "the mistaken impression that Trump made a direct call for violent action." Trump's complaint accuses the broadcaster of "intentionally, maliciously and deceptively doctoring" the speech. The BBC argues that the programme does not meet the legal criteria for defamation and was not available in the US.

What the judge found plausible

Kuntz dismissed the second claim, which was brought under Florida's Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act, because he ruled the documentary did not constitute commercial speech. On the defamation claim, he wrote that Trump plausibly pleaded damages, reasoning that a defamatory documentary released toward an election could cause reputational harm. He added that the editing itself may independently establish a plausible case of actual malice. He also cited past errors in the broadcaster's coverage as bearing on its state of mind, and he rejected the BBC's view that the cut was ordinary condensing of a long speech. The judge's language on the edit was blunt.

“This was not trimming around the edges but creating something different than what was stated in the speech.”

Deadline for sworn answers

A judge ordered Trump in October to answer questions under oath by 11 December, after he cancelled an earlier deposition in October citing "matters of national importance." A lawyer for the BBC told the court that Trump had been campaigning in Georgia on the scheduled day and had prioritised that over answering their questions. Earlier in 2026, Trump's lawyers conceded they had no evidence that the documentary was available in the US on BritBox or the BBC's website, as they had originally claimed. The case now moves to its next stage, with the sworn-answer deadline set for 11 December.