BBC lawyers are moving to subpoena Don Jr., Ivanka, and Jared Kushner in Trump’s $10B defamation case

The claim is largely accurate because the BBC asked a court for permission to subpoena Donald Trump Jr., Ivanka Trump, and Jared Kushner in President Donald Trump’s roughly $10 billion defamation lawsuit.

However, reporting did not necessarily establish that the subpoenas had been issued or successfully served when the claim was published.

BBC seeks to subpoena Trump children and son-in-law over defamation lawsuit - BBC | The Guardian
Source: theguardian.com

BBC seeks to subpoena Trump children and son-in-law over defamation lawsuit - BBC | The Guardian
Source: theguardian.com

At a glance

Key Evidence

Verified August 15, 2026

The Guardian reported that the BBC asked the court for permission to serve Donald Trump Jr., Ivanka Trump, and Jared Kushner with subpoenas seeking testimony and records concerning January 6, 2021.
The BBC and Forbes described previous service attempts and said Secret Service protection had made delivery difficult or impossible.
Politico and other publications placed the dispute within President Donald Trump’s approximately $10 billion defamation lawsuit against the BBC.

The reporting

What the Evidence Shows

Several reports dated August 14, 2026, support the claim’s main point. The BBC is pursuing testimony and documents from Donald Trump Jr., Ivanka Trump, and Jared Kushner about matters connected to January 6, 2021, which relate to President Donald Trump’s defamation action over a BBC documentary.

A key qualification is necessary:

The Guardian said the BBC submitted a motion asking the court for permission to serve subpoenas on the three individuals.
The BBC reported that its lawyers had tried to deliver subpoenas in May, indicating that procedural or access-related obstacles had arisen.
Forbes said Secret Service protection had prevented service to that point and that the BBC had asked a federal judge to intervene.
Coverage commonly characterized the lawsuit as seeking $10 billion. The supplied reports support that description, though the precise amount and current procedural posture should ideally be checked against the court docket.

Thus, the phrase “moving to subpoena” fairly describes the BBC’s effort, but it could be read to suggest that the family members had already received valid subpoenas. The available reporting more specifically indicates that the BBC was seeking authorization and attempting service, without confirming that completed subpoenas were already operative.

Primary trail