8 Famous Defamation Cases You Should Know

The First Amendment protects speech. It also lets the press report freely and openly without being punished by the government.

But there are several key forms of speech that are not protected — including defamation.

If you have heard of defamation, it is likely through news about high-profile court cases where one person accuses another person, often a journalist or news outlet, of defaming them.

Several famous defamation cases are highlighted in this article. But first, here’s a brief description of what defamation is and how it’s related to slander and libel.

Defamation, slander and libel defined

Defamation is speech that harms the reputation of a living person through writing or speaking. Speech that meets the narrow legal definition of defamation — as outlined in each state’s laws — is not protected by the First Amendment and can be punished through a civil lawsuit in which the person who claims they were defamed can receive financial compensation from the person who defamed them.

RELATED: What Is Defamation? Everything You Should Know

There are two types of defamation:

1. Libel damages the reputation of a living person through writing.
2. Slander damages the reputation of a living person through speaking.

RELATED: What Is Libel? A First Amendment Analysis

An easy way to remember the difference: Slander, like “speak,” starts with an “s.”

8 famous defamation cases to know

Some of these high-profile cases involve claims of libel, while others involve slander. All these cases involve defamation claims, but not all were successful.

L.B. Sullivan and The New York Times (1964)

Why it’s famous:

This might be the most famous defamation case on this list due to its lasting impact on modern media law and press freedom. The case, which made it to the U.S. Supreme Court, set a standard for how defamation claims are measured when they concern public officials and public figures (New York Times Co. v. Sullivan).

Background:

L.B. Sullivan was a commissioner of public affairs and, in that role, oversaw the police department in Montgomery, Alabama. In 1960, The New York Times published a paid advertisement that sought funds for the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.’s legal defense for charges in the state. The ad criticized the police and contained factual errors. Sullivan, who was not mentioned by name, requested that the Times issue a correction, even though it was an advertisement, and the newspaper declined. Sullivan sued in Alabama state court and won, receiving a $500,000 judgement. The Times eventually appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

What happened:

The Supreme Court ruled that a public official such as Sullivan must meet the high bar of showing that the false statements about him were made with “actual malice” — which Sullivan could not do. Under this new standard, someone claiming such defamation must show that a speaker, including a news outlet or journalist, knew their statements were false and published them anyway or acted out of “reckless disregard for whether it was true or false.”

The ruling set this high bar for public officials — and later extended it to apply to public figures as well — in order to provide the “breathing space” needed for free expression to survive.

Oprah Winfrey and the cattlemen (1997)

Why it’s famous:

Oprah Winfrey is one of the most prominent TV hosts and cultural influencers of the past 50 years. In the 1990s, at the peak of her daily show’s popularity, her recommendations for books and products could drive sales. TV networks that aired her talk show ahead of their evening newscast had a large audience spike compared with their competitors at other stations.

Background:

In a 1996 episode of her show, titled “Dangerous Food,” Winfrey featured a guest who spoke out against food industry practices and the concern over beef processing. The guest, Howard Lyman, was a former cattle rancher and farmer turned advocate for vegetarian eating. The show centered on concerns over mad cow disease and the potential for human infection through eating tainted meat due to industry practices that mix cow brain tissue into some beef products. Oprah said that discussion “has just stopped me cold from eating another burger. I’m stopped.” A Texas-based cattle group sued Winfrey and Lyman based on the state’s so-called “food libel” or “veggie libel” law prohibiting false statements that perishable food products are not fit for public consumption.

What happened:

A jury decided Winfrey was not liable for defamation under the “veggie libel” criteria. She emerged from the courthouse and proclaimed, “Free speech not only lives, it rocks!” The trial also helped launch a now-famous public figure into the national spotlight: Winfrey’s legal team hired clinical psychologist Phil McGraw — now known as Dr. Phil — who worked as a jury consultant to help clients understand how to select juries favorable to them.

Johnny Depp and Amber Heard (2022)

Why it’s famous:

Johnny Depp and Amber Heard are both famous actors, with Depp starring in multiple major roles in the past 30 years, including the popular “Pirates of the Caribbean” franchise and portraying Willy Wonka, and Heard appearing in films such as the DC Comics adaptations “Aquaman” and “Justice League.”

Background:

The pair got married in 2015. Heard filed for divorce the next year. She claimed Depp had physically abused her. In 2018, Heard wrote an opinion column for The Washington Post in which she described the experience of being a victim of domestic abuse and urged Congress to pass stronger legislation protecting women from violence. She did not mention Depp by name, but he sued her for defamation. Heard countersued based on statements from Depp’s attorney about her setting up an “abuse hoax” against Depp.

What happened:

A trial in Virginia happened in 2022, with the jury considering both Depp’s and Heard’s claims separately. It was streamed live and became regular viewing for people around the world and a topic of daily news coverage and social media conversation. For Depp’s claims, the jury found Heard had acted with “actual malice” and awarded Depp more than $15 million, which was later reduced. The jury also found partially in favor of Heard’s claims against Depp’s former lawyer and awarded her $2 million. Both continued with appeals but eventually settled their competing awards out of court. The case has continued to garner public attention, with Netflix releasing a docuseries in 2023 recounting the trial.

Dominion, Smartmatic and Fox News (2023)

Why it’s famous:

Fox News is among the largest and most watched cable television networks in the country. Dominion Voting Systems and Smartmatic are separate companies that make and provide electronic voting machine services to states and counties around the country.

Background:

Following the 2020 presidential election, many people advanced theories that the election was rigged against or stolen from Donald Trump in favor of Joe Biden. Guests and employees of Fox News programming discussed theories, including that the voting machine technology provided by Dominion and Smartmatic helped “steal” the election from Trump. Both companies sued Fox News separately for defamation.

What happened:

Dominion filed its lawsuit in December 2021, seeking $1.6 billion in damages. In March 2023, as the defamation trial was about to begin, the judge announced that the two parties had settled the case, with Fox agreeing to pay Dominion more than $787 million.

Dominion also filed a similar yet separate defamation lawsuit against the cable channel Newsmax. The case was scheduled for an October 2025 trial, but in August, the parties announced a settlement. Newsmax agreed to pay Dominion $67 million.  

Smartmatic filed a similar lawsuit against Fox News in February 2021 seeking $2.7 billion in damages. The next day, Fox News canceled anchor Lou Dobbs’ show, where guests had made claims about Smartmatic. The case has proceeded slowly, and as of June 2025 it was still moving forward, with a judge ruling that Fox was allowed to receive new evidence from Smartmatic. Fox also accused Smartmatic executives of deleting evidence, and Smartmatic accused Fox executives of the same. To date, the case has not been scheduled for trial.

Alex Jones and the Sandy Hook families (2022)

Why it’s famous:

Alex Jones has long been known for his conspiracy theories pushed through his radio show and podcast “Infowars.” After the mass shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, that killed 20 students and six educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School, Jones advanced the theory that it was a “false flag” attack, and the government was working with paid crisis actors to promote gun control.

Background:

A group of parents whose children were killed sued Jones in Connecticut and Texas for defamation and other claims, saying his large platform led people to harass them and caused emotional distress.

What happened:

In 2022, Jones was found liable in the cases and ordered to pay $1.4 billion to the families, a sum he said he could not afford. He filed for bankruptcy and later said the mass shooting was real and the children had been killed. As of June 5, 2025, NPR reported that the families still had not collected any of the money as Jones’ bankruptcy case continues. More recently, new lawsuits are alleging that Jones has tried to hide his assets, including through “‘sham transactions’ to move assets beyond the reach of creditors.”

Sarah Palin and The New York Times (2025)

Why it’s famous:

Sarah Palin was the Republican nominee for vice president in 2008, rising quickly in national prominence after Sen. John McCain picked her as his running mate. As Alaska governor and vice-presidential candidate, she made a name for herself by criticizing news coverage from what she often called “the lamestream media.”

Background:

The New York Times editorial board published an opinion editorial in 2017 that criticized Palin for “political incitement” over an advertisement from her political action committee from years earlier. The editorial said Palin’s use of graphics looked like crosshairs of a gun scope over specific electoral districts, and they connected that to the heated rhetoric in the country and the 2011 shooting of U.S. Rep. Gabby Giffords in Arizona. Palin sued the Times for defamation.

What happened:

The Times corrected the editorial to avoid implicating Palin, but the lawsuit went forward. A judge dismissed the suit, but it was later reinstated by a federal district court and went to trial. In 2022, a jury sided with the Times, saying Palin had not proved “actual malice” by the newspaper. However, the previous day, the judge indicated he would dismiss the case regardless of the jury’s verdict. That opened the door for a federal appeals court to revive the case again, saying the judge had made a mistake with that announcement. A new trial began, and in April 2025, another jury found the Times was not liable for defamation against Palin.

Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni (2024-2025)

Why it’s famous:

Blake Lively is a famous actor known for her roles in “The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants” and “Gossip Girl” and is married to actor Ryan Reynolds. Justin Baldoni has had his own success as an actor in movie and TV roles and being known as an advocate for women, with some labeling him a “male feminist.” The two starred in the 2024 movie “It Ends with Us,” with Baldoni also directing, which is the impetus for this case.

Background:

After the movie’s release, Lively accused Baldoni of sexual harassment and also said that he retaliated against her on the movie set after she complained about it. She originally filed a complaint with the California Civil Rights Department but later filed a federal lawsuit against him and Wayfarer Studios, the production company, co-founded by Baldoni, that produced “It Ends with Us.” Baldoni and Wayfarer sued Lively and Reynolds for defamation and extortion. The dueling suits became the buzz of the entertainment industry and ramped up because Baldoni also sued The New York Times for defamation over its coverage of the case.

What happened:

A judge dismissed Baldoni’s defamation lawsuits against Lively, Reynolds and the Times in June 2025. The court noted that Lively is protected from a defamation claim because “allegations made in a lawsuit are exempt” from claims of libel or defamation and the Times is protected because it accurately reported on Lively’s legal filing.

X and Media Matters (ongoing)

Why it’s famous:

X is a prominent social media company, having rebranded from Twitter after billionaire Elon Musk bought the platform in 2022. Media Matters is a well-known liberal advocacy and media watchdog group that researches and reports about conservative groups and causes.

Background:

Media Matters released a report in 2023 claiming multiple companies’ ads on X appeared next to “pro-Nazi” content. Some companies pulled back from advertising on the platform. Musk and X sued Media Matters for, among other things, “business disparagement,” a legal claim that mirrors a traditional defamation lawsuit. X alleged that Media Matters made false statements of fact about X and did so with actual malice because Media Matters knew these statements were false.

As part of its lawsuit, X also demanded that Media Matters turn over the names and addresses of Media Matters’ donors.

What happened:

X had obtained an order from a federal District Court requiring Media Matters to turn over that donor information. Media Matters appealed that ruling to a federal Court of Appeals. The legal organization Knight First Amendment Institute has argued in favor of Media Matters’ ability to keep its donor lists private as a matter of First Amendment privilege. In October 2024, that Court of Appeals temporarily blocked the District Court’s order that Media Matters must turn over its donor lists until it can fully decide the issue. The Court of Appeals has not issued a ruling as of June 30, 2025.

Scott A. Leadingham is a content writer at Freedom Forum. He can be reached at [email protected]