The BBC’s attempt to drag members of Donald Trump’s family into his $10 billion defamation lawsuit took a dramatic turn when lawyers trying to serve court papers at Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner’s Miami residence were reportedly stopped by police.
The confrontation, first reported by Politico, has now become part of an escalating legal dispute over whether the British broadcaster can question Ivanka, Kushner and Donald Trump Jr. about the president’s actions surrounding Jan. 6, 2021.
BBC attorneys are seeking documents and sworn deposition testimony from all three.
The broadcaster argues that Trump’s adult children and son-in-law may possess information directly relevant to the president’s intentions when he delivered his speech at the Ellipse before a mob of his supporters attacked the U.S. Capitol.
According to the BBC’s court filings, evidence gathered by the House Jan. 6 Committee indicated that Trump Jr. and Ivanka were present while their father revised the speech. They were also reportedly with him when he delivered it.
Follow @allchronologyKushner, meanwhile, allegedly drafted a statement condemning the violence that followed.
Those details could become important because Trump’s lawsuit centers on how the BBC edited his remarks—and whether that edit falsely portrayed him as explicitly encouraging the attack.
The president sued the broadcaster over a 2024 documentary that combined portions of his Ellipse speech delivered at different times. The finished sequence made the statements appear closer together than they were in the original address.
Trump contends that the edit made it sound as though he endorsed violence at the Capitol and caused enormous damage to his reputation.
The BBC has apologized for the way the footage was assembled. But it denies that the mistake satisfies the legal requirements for defamation, including proof of falsity, fault and reputational harm.
As part of its defense, the broadcaster wants access to people who were reportedly close to Trump when the speech was written and delivered.
That effort has not gone smoothly.
In May, representatives attempting to deliver subpoenas at Ivanka and Kushner’s Miami home were reportedly physically prevented from approaching by law-enforcement officers assigned to the property.
The Secret Service subsequently made clear that it would not accept the subpoenas for the couple.
“The United States Secret Service, as an agency of the United States Government, is not authorized to accept service of these subpoenas for these individuals,” agency attorney Troy Epstein wrote.
A separate attempt to serve Trump Jr. at Trump Tower in New York also failed.
Trump’s legal team has reportedly declined to accept the subpoenas on behalf of the three family members. That has left the BBC asking a federal judge in Miami for permission to use an alternative method.
The broadcaster wants the court to authorize service by mail or declare that delivering the papers to Trump’s attorneys would satisfy the legal requirement.
A failed service attempt does not necessarily prove that Ivanka, Kushner or Trump Jr. deliberately evaded a subpoena. Individuals protected by the Secret Service live and work behind controlled security perimeters, and agents generally cannot accept legal documents without authorization.
Still, the repeated failures have created a remarkable spectacle: Trump initiated an enormous lawsuit against the BBC, but the broadcaster says it cannot formally reach close members of his family whom it considers essential witnesses.
The dispute could become dangerous for the president’s case.
By suing for defamation and claiming billions of dollars in damages, Trump opened the door to discovery—a process that may allow the BBC to request records, communications and testimony concerning his reputation, financial interests and the impact of the documentary.
The judge overseeing the litigation has reportedly warned that the case could expose aspects of the Trump family’s finances.
Defamation plaintiffs must ordinarily demonstrate that the disputed publication caused measurable harm. If Trump seeks substantial financial damages, the BBC may attempt to examine whether his income, businesses or political standing actually suffered after the documentary aired.
Follow @allchronologyThe broadcaster could also question whether other controversies—rather than the BBC edit—contributed to any alleged reputational injury.
Trump’s family members may therefore possess information relevant to multiple parts of the case, from his state of mind on Jan. 6 to the damages he claims resulted from the broadcast.
The fight over service is only a preliminary battle. Even if a judge allows the subpoenas to be delivered by mail or through Trump’s attorneys, Ivanka, Kushner and Trump Jr. could still challenge their scope, relevance or enforceability.
But the episode illustrates the risks of launching a high-profile defamation action.
Trump’s lawsuit was intended to force the BBC to answer for an edit it has already acknowledged should not have been made. Instead, the litigation may compel his own relatives to answer questions under oath and produce private records.
For now, the BBC’s lawyers have been unable to place the papers directly into their hands.
The next move belongs to the federal court—and its ruling could determine whether the president’s family can remain outside the case he chose to bring.
