A deadline for sworn testimony
A federal magistrate judge has ordered President Donald Trump to sit for a deposition by December 11 in his $10 billion defamation lawsuit against the BBC. The ruling follows a canceled October deposition and a dispute over whether the president and his lawyers have moved slowly in responding to the broadcaster’s discovery requests.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Enjolique Lett issued the order from the bench during a Thursday hearing, according to Trump’s personal legal team. His lawyers say presidential duties and security requirements must take priority when scheduling testimony. The BBC argues that sworn questioning and document production are necessary to test Trump’s allegations and claimed damages.
The dispute concerns an edited speech
The case was filed in Florida federal court over a BBC Panorama documentary aired shortly before the 2024 presidential election. The program combined portions of Trump’s January 6, 2021 speech in a way that, according to the lawsuit, misleadingly suggested he directly instructed supporters to storm the U.S. Capitol.
The BBC has acknowledged that the editing was misleading and apologized, but it denies legal liability for defamation. Trump alleges the edit was intentional and caused serious reputational and financial harm. A leaked internal BBC memorandum later cited the segment as evidence of possible political bias, contributing to a public controversy and senior resignations at the broadcaster.
Discovery reaches financial records
Because Trump seeks at least $10 billion, the BBC is requesting financial information connected to the claimed harm, including records from the Mar-a-Lago club and related business entities. The broadcaster says those materials are needed to evaluate damages. Trump’s attorneys call the requests overly broad and unrelated to the disputed program.
A deposition allows the BBC’s lawyers to question Trump under oath, but it is not a trial and does not decide whether the broadcaster defamed him. Attorneys may object to particular questions, and disputes over scope or privilege can return to the judge. A transcript could later be used in motions or at trial, subject to evidence rules.
Defamation claims brought by a public figure generally require proof beyond showing that a statement was inaccurate. The plaintiff typically must establish that the publisher knew the material was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth, as well as proving legally recognized harm. The BBC’s admission about the edit may be important evidence, but the parties still dispute intent, context, causation and damages.
Scheduling tests the boundary between roles
The case is privately filed by a sitting president rather than brought on behalf of the federal government. That creates a recurring tension: Trump chose to pursue personal claims, while his legal team argues that official responsibilities constrain when and how he can participate. The December deadline reflects the court’s effort to move discovery forward without deciding the merits.
The next steps include the deposition, continued document exchanges and possible motions challenging the legal sufficiency of the claim. The BBC’s apology may be relevant to the facts, but liability will depend on defamation law, the program’s full context, evidence of fault and proof of actual harm. The court may also set limits on confidential business records before they are exchanged. Additional scheduling disputes remain possible before December, as do appeals over discovery scope. The order ensures those questions proceed on a defined timetable.
Source: Reuters legal reporting. Reporting reviewed October 23, 2026.