Judge Tosses Kash Patel Defamation Suit Over "Googly-Eyed" Insult
A federal judge has dismissed FBI Director Kash Patel's defamation lawsuit against a blogger who called him a "Kremlin asset," ruling that Nevada courts never had jurisdiction over the case in the first place.
Patel and the Kash Foundation originally sued blogger and podcaster Jim Stewartson in June 2023, seeking $10 million in damages over a series of posts on X and Substack published between 2021 and 2023. The lawsuit alleged Stewartson falsely claimed Patel had attempted to overthrow the government, helped plan the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, was "guilty of sedition," acted as a "Kremlin asset," and paid people to lie to Congress. Patel's complaint included claims of defamation, injurious falsehood and business disparagement.
Stewartson did not initially respond to the suit, and the court entered a default judgment in Patel's favor in August 2025, awarding him and his foundation $250,000 in compensatory and punitive damages. Stewartson later moved to have that judgment vacated, arguing Nevada courts had no jurisdiction over him since he's a California resident whose posts weren't specifically directed at Nevada.
Why the Case Was Dismissed
Nevada Chief U.S. District Judge Andrew Gordon agreed with Stewartson in a July 25 ruling, finding the state lacked personal jurisdiction over him despite Patel being a Nevada resident. "The plaintiffs' allegations arise out of Stewartson's allegedly defamatory posts on X and Substack, which are about the plaintiffs, who are Nevadan residents," Gordon wrote. "They allege that Stewartson's X followers include Nevada residents and that he tagged Patel, a Nevadan resident, but they do not allege that Stewartson interacted with or tagged his Nevadan followers in relation to the allegedly defamatory posts." Gordon added that Stewartson's posts were aimed at a national audience rather than specifically targeting Nevada.
Gordon's order also referenced several of the more pointed insults Stewartson had directed at Patel online, including calling him a "blatantly incompetent chud" and a "Googly-eyed Kremlin b----."
According to court filings cited by the Las Vegas Review-Journal, Gordon also weighed in more broadly on the lawsuit's merits, saying, "When we're talking about elected (and other government) officials, First Amendment protections are at their zenith. And frankly, this is not the only suit, I believe, that Kash Patel has filed, and I think our elected officials should have better things to do than trying to file suits against their critics."
Part of a Broader Pattern of Litigation
This isn't Patel's only defamation fight. In April, a federal judge in Texas dismissed a separate defamation suit Patel brought against former MSNBC contributor Frank Figliuzzi over on-air comments about Patel's evening activities, ruling that Figliuzzi's remarks amounted to protected opinion rather than a factual claim. That ruling came just two days after Patel filed another defamation suit, this one against The Atlantic, seeking $250 million over a story alleging he drinks excessively and has had unexplained absences from the bureau. The Atlantic has said it stands by its reporting and intends to defend the suit.
Patel's attorneys did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the Nevada ruling or their next steps, if any.
Curious for more stories that keep you informed and entertained? From the latest headlines to everyday insights, YourLifeBuzz has more to explore. Dive into what’s next.