Donald Trump has filed a defamation lawsuit in the United States against the BBC, seeking at least 5 billion dollars in damages over edited footage aired by the broadcaster relating to his 6 January 2021 speech, minutes before his supporters stormed the US Capitol.
The lawsuit marks the first time Trump has targeted a major foreign media organisation through the American court system, expanding his long-standing battle against outlets he accuses of bias or malicious reporting.
According to reporting from the Associated Press, The Guardian and The New York Times, Trump’s legal team chose to sue in the US because British law requires defamation cases to be filed within one year of publication. The Panorama episode in question aired more than a year ago, meaning the deadline for litigation in the UK has expired.
What Trump claims
Trump argues that Panorama deliberately edited his speech to portray him as urging supporters to march with him to Congress and “fight like hell,” while removing the line in which he called for a peaceful demonstration.
Lawyers for Trump say this editorial choice painted a false and defamatory picture of his role in the riot and caused “severe reputational and economic damage,” according to the court filings. They add that internal BBC documents leaked to UK media strengthened their case: an external standards reviewer expressed concern that the editing may have breached editorial guidelines and misled viewers.
The documentary triggered a crisis inside the BBC shortly before the 2024 US election, leading to the resignation of two senior executives responsible for editorial oversight.
The BBC’s response
The BBC has publicly apologised to Trump, acknowledging a “serious lapse in judgment” and admitting that the edit could have created a misleading impression. However, the corporation maintains that it does not believe the error constitutes defamation under US law.
As Reuters and the BBC itself have reported, the broadcaster insists that the documentary was “substantially accurate and fair” and that it never intended to misrepresent Trump’s words. The programme has since been withdrawn from all BBC platforms and will not be rebroadcast.
The BBC is funded through a mandatory licence fee, meaning that any damages paid would come indirectly from UK taxpayers. British legal commentators told Sky News and The Telegraph that this raises delicate political questions, especially given the scale of damages sought.
A higher bar in the US
To win a defamation case as a public figure in the United States, Trump must prove two things:
-
that the BBC presented false information that harmed his reputation, and
-
that the broadcaster acted with actual malice, either knowing the material was misleading or showing reckless disregard for the truth.
This is a very high threshold, established by the landmark Supreme Court case New York Times v. Sullivan, and legal analysts quoted by CNN and NBC News say Trump faces an uphill battle.
A broader legal strategy
This case forms part of a wider post-2024 legal offensive by Trump against news organisations. Several US outlets, including local newspapers and digital platforms, have already agreed to out-of-court settlements after similar lawsuits.
However, major publications such as The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal continue to fight the claims, arguing they are protected by the First Amendment.
Trump’s team is using the BBC case to reinforce a broader political narrative: that major media institutions have acted unfairly and unlawfully towards him, especially in coverage relating to the 2020 election and the Capitol attack.