Trump asks court to quash BBC subpoenas for his family in $10B libel suit

President Donald Trump has asked a federal court to reject the BBC's attempt to subpoena members of his family in a $10 billion lawsuit related to a documentary aired by the broadcaster.

On Friday (Aug. 15), Trump's lawyers argued that the BBC conducted a “politically motivated discovery campaign” by seeking to compel his eldest son Donald Trump Jr., daughter Ivanka Trump, and son-in-law Jared Kushner to testify. Trump's legal team urged the court to dismiss the BBC's motion, characterizing it as a “fishing expedition” that goes beyond the scope of the case.

In a court filing submitted on Aug. 15, Trump's attorneys wrote: “This case concerns a narrow wrong—the BBC's deliberate splicing of two portions of President Trump's January 6, 2021, speech that were nearly 55 minutes apart. Instead of litigating that narrow claim, the BBC has sought to pursue a sweeping investigation disguised as discovery.”

The dispute began in December 2024, when Trump announced he would sue the BBC over an episode of the Panorama documentary series chronicling the Republican leader's path to a second term. Part of the film focused on the events of January 6, 2021, the day the 2020 election results were certified. Trump lost that election but falsely claimed his defeat was due to fraud.

In a speech outside the White House that day, he repeated the baseless allegation that the election was “rigged” before supporters, some of whom participated in the attack on the Capitol hours later. The Panorama episode included excerpts from Trump's speech, and critics argued that two sentences had been edited together to sound like a continuous quote.

Specifically, the first sentence was: “After this, we're going to walk down, and I'll be there with you, we're going to walk down.” The second came from a later part of the speech: “And we fight. We fight to the end.” Although the BBC apologized for the editing and removed the episode from its platforms, Trump filed suit against the broadcaster, alleging defamation. The BBC has denied the claim and vowed to contest it in court. The case is currently before the Southern District of Florida.

In its defense, the BBC sought depositions from people close to Trump to determine his state of mind and actions on the day of the Jan. 6 attack. The BBC noted that both Donald Trump Jr. and Ivanka Trump were present at their father's speech and spoke with the president and his inner circle as violence erupted at the Capitol. Text messages released by the U.S. Congress showed Donald Trump Jr. urging his father's chief of staff to “condemn this immediately”—an event cited in the BBC's filing.

While Kushner was not at the White House, the BBC maintained that his advisory role to Trump would also help establish the facts of that day. Lawyers for the broadcaster said that after speaking with congressional leaders, Kushner drafted “a proposed statement” for Trump “condemning the use of violence.” According to the BBC's filing, testimony from Trump Jr., Ivanka Trump, and Kushner could help clarify “the president's burden to prove that the implication that he incited violence on January 6 is materially false.”

However, the BBC said it could not serve subpoenas on the three family members due to the presence of the U.S. Secret Service. The BBC reportedly attempted to deliver subpoenas to Ivanka Trump and Kushner at their residence in May but was met by Secret Service agents who said they were not authorized to accept documents. Similarly, that month, the BBC could not serve Trump Jr. at Trump Tower in New York. Consequently, the BBC asked the court to allow substituted service via certified mail.

But in the Aug. 15 filing, Trump's lawyers accused the BBC of conducting a “campaign of harassment” involving “the president's family, associates, employees, officials, and others.” They also called the BBC's effort an “unbounded re-investigation of the events of January 6, 2021.” The filing suggested that any interactions involving Ivanka Trump and Kushner were “protected by executive privilege” because the couple served as advisers—Ivanka as a senior adviser and Kushner as a top adviser—to the president.

Trump has made sweeping claims of executive privilege throughout his two terms. Earlier this month, the U.S. Department of Justice issued a memo stating that such privilege protects communications with private advisers working outside the executive branch, meaning interactions with companies and individuals are not subject to subpoenas. Critics worry the memo will hinder government transparency under Trump and may even prevent Congress from accessing investigative documents. Senator Adam Schiff of California described the memo as an insurance policy against congressional oversight if Republicans lose their majority in Congress in the midterm elections in November. In a statement on Aug. 11, Schiff wrote: “This latest opinion should be seen as a partisan measure to shield the president and his corrupt activities from congressional subpoenas when the majority flips.”

The federal court in the Southern District of Florida has not yet ruled on the BBC's subpoena requests. Meanwhile, the BBC has sought to dismiss the entire lawsuit, arguing that Trump is attempting to stifle free speech.