News · Report
What does Candace Owens's motion to dismiss argue in Harpole v. Owens?
Owens and her companies filed a partial motion to dismiss and a petition under Tennessee's anti-SLAPP law on August 6, 2026. The motion says the Fort Huachuca allegations are for a later stage.
By Americans for Transparency · Published
The short answer
On August 6, 2026, Candace Owens and two of her companies filed a partial motion to dismiss and a petition under the Tennessee Public Participation Act, the state's anti-SLAPP law. The motion argues the complaint fails to state some claims and that the suit targets protected speech. It states that the Fort Huachuca allegations will be dealt with in a later motion for summary judgment. No court has ruled on it.
- Filed August 6, 2026 by Owens and two of her companies (Doc. 31).
- It is a partial motion to dismiss plus a petition under Tennessee's anti-SLAPP law.
- It says the Fort Huachuca allegations are reserved for a later summary-judgment motion.
- As of October 2026 the court has not ruled on it.
What was filed
On August 6, 2026, Candace Owens and two of her companies filed a partial motion to dismiss together with a petition under the Tennessee Public Participation Act, the state's anti-SLAPP statute. The filing is Doc. 31 on the public docket.[1][2]
What it argues
The motion argues that the complaint does not state some of its claims as a matter of law and that the lawsuit targets protected speech on a matter of public concern, which the anti-SLAPP statute is designed to screen. It is a "partial" motion because it does not seek to dismiss every count at this stage.[1]
On the central factual dispute, the motion says the Fort Huachuca allegations are not for this stage.[1]
“Plaintiff’s allegations concerning Fort Huachuca will be dealt with in a later motion for summary judgment.”
What a court has decided
Nothing yet. Los Angeles Magazine, reporting on the motions in September 2026, noted the court had not ruled. The full-district recusal eight days before the motion was filed left no judge in place to decide it.[3][2]
“The court has yet to make a ruling on either of these issues.”
Questions people ask
Does the motion say the Fort Huachuca claim is false?
It disputes the claim, but it asks the court to defer that factual question to a later summary-judgment stage. The motion itself turns on legal sufficiency and the anti-SLAPP statute, not on a factual finding.
What is a partial motion to dismiss?
One that seeks to dismiss some but not all of the claims in a complaint. The remaining claims would continue if the motion succeeds only in part.
Sources
- [1]U.S. District Court, M.D. Tenn., Owens defendants' partial motion to dismiss and TPPA petition, Doc. 31, August 6, 2026. Primary record“Plaintiff’s allegations concerning Fort Huachuca will be dealt with in a later motion for summary judgment.”
- [2]CourtListener / RECAP, Harpole v. Owens, No. 3:26-cv-00556 (M.D. Tenn.), docket sheet, October 12, 2026. Primary record
- [3]Los Angeles Magazine, Candace Owens Moves to Toss Bombshell Lawsuit Accusing Her of Linking Kirk Security Chief to Assassination Plot, September 15, 2026. News report“The court has yet to make a ruling on either of these issues.”