FOLLOW US

A New York federal judge has dismissed former U.S. Representative Devin Nunes’ defamation lawsuit against NBCUniversal, ruling that the media company did not act with actual malice when reporting on Nunes' alleged failure to provide the FBI with a package from a suspected Russian agent. The court also granted NBCUniversal’s motion for sanctions, ordering Nunes to pay litigation costs due to his failure to preserve records from his time in Congress.

The order, issued Friday by U.S. District Judge P. Kevin Castel, grants summary judgment in favor of NBCUniversal Media LLC, ending the lawsuit filed by Nunes — now the CEO of Trump Media & Technology Group.

Background: Claims Stemming From Maddow’s 2021 Broadcast

The case centered around a March 2021 episode of “The Rachel Maddow Show,” in which Maddow reported that Nunes received a package from Andrii Derkach, a Ukrainian lawmaker with ties to Russian intelligence, and that Nunes had “refused” to hand it over to the FBI. Nunes claimed that the statement was false and defamatory, arguing that he gave the package to federal authorities the same day it was received.

NBCUniversal defended the segment by noting it relied on a July 23, 2020, Politico article that quoted a source familiar with the matter saying that the package “was not turned over to the FBI.” While the Maddow segment didn’t cite the Politico article directly, the network maintained it formed the basis for the reporting and did not amount to actual malice — a critical standard in defamation cases involving public figures.

The Ruling: No Malice, No Defamation

Judge Castel found that Nunes failed to prove “actual malice” — the legal threshold required for a public figure to prevail in a defamation suit, as established in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964). The judge concluded that Nunes offered no clear and convincing evidence that NBCUniversal either knew the statement was false or recklessly disregarded the truth.

“Nunes is unable to show, through clear and convincing evidence, that defendant either had actual knowledge of the falsity of the statement or recklessly disregarded the truth of the statement,” Judge Castel wrote.

The judge emphasized that reliance on a single source — particularly a reputable one like Politico — does not constitute malice under prevailing legal standards. Maddow and the show’s executive producer, Cory Gnazzo, both testified that they believed the Politico article was reliable, and that its authors were respected.