Back to all stories

11th Circuit Rejects Trump’s En Banc Bid in CNN 'Big Lie' Defamation Case

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit on March 17, 2026, refused to rehear President Donald Trump’s defamation lawsuit against CNN over its use of the term “Big Lie” to describe his false 2020 election claims, leaving in place a prior panel ruling that tossed the case. A three‑judge panel, including two Trump appointees, had unanimously upheld a Florida district court’s 2023 dismissal, finding that CNN’s statements were protected opinion rather than provably false facts and that Trump failed to show the network acted with actual malice, the constitutional standard for public‑figure defamation. Trump argued that the “Big Lie” label was meant to liken him to Adolf Hitler and Nazi propaganda, but the appellate panel called that theory “unpersuasive” and said treating the phrase as a concrete factual assertion was “untenable,” with his remaining claims deemed “meritless.” The full court’s denial came without explanation or dissent, and Trump’s remaining option is to seek Supreme Court review, even though the justices recently declined to revisit the actual malice standard when asked by a Trump donor. The outcome reinforces strong First Amendment protections for political commentary about election lies at a moment when public debates about disinformation and media liability are intensifying online and in Congress.

Donald Trump Defamation and First Amendment Law Media and 2020 Election Coverage

📌 Key Facts

  • On March 17, 2026, the full 11th Circuit declined to rehear Trump’s defamation case against CNN en banc, issuing no explanation or dissent.
  • A three‑judge 11th Circuit panel, including two Trump appointees, had unanimously affirmed dismissal in November, holding that CNN’s “Big Lie” characterizations were non‑actionable opinion and not provably false statements of fact.
  • U.S. District Judge Raag Singhal, also a Trump appointee, originally dismissed the case in 2023, finding no plausible showing that CNN acted with actual malice toward Trump as required for public‑figure defamation claims.

📊 Relevant Data

Media defendants win approximately 51% of libel cases on dispositive motions before trial, according to a Media Law Resource Center study on contemporary libel litigation.

Chapter 3: The Empirical Reality of Contemporary Libel Litigation — Media Law Resource Center

The success rate on appeal of damage awards in libel cases is 33.3%, as reported in the Media Law Resource Center's 2025 bulletin, indicating that even trial wins for plaintiffs are often overturned.

BULLETIN - Media Law Resource Center — Media Law Resource Center

Defamation lawsuits are disproportionately filed by wealthy individuals and powerful entities, as high litigation costs create barriers for average citizens, with billionaires increasingly using such suits to challenge media coverage.

How billionaires and powerful law firms are working to restrict libel protections and silence the press in Trump's America — Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism

📰 Source Timeline (1)

Follow how coverage of this story developed over time