WUHAN, November 4, 2026: A Chinese court has begun hearing a major defamation lawsuit involving the US state of Missouri, marking another significant development in the long-running legal dispute between China and the United States over the COVID-19 pandemic.

The case, being heard by the Wuhan Intermediate People’s Court in China’s Hubei province, was brought by the Wuhan municipal government, the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

The plaintiffs have accused Missouri and three current or former attorneys general of pursuing what they describe as malicious legal action, spreading false information and making discriminatory statements connected to the coronavirus pandemic.

The Chinese parties are seeking a public apology, restoration of their reputations and financial compensation reportedly amounting to 356.44 billion yuan, equivalent to approximately $53.44 billion.

The proceedings add a new dimension to the legal and diplomatic tensions that have continued between Washington and Beijing since the global pandemic began.

Why China Has Taken Legal Action Against Missouri

The latest lawsuit is closely connected to Missouri’s earlier legal campaign against Chinese government institutions over the economic consequences of COVID-19.

In April 2020, Missouri filed a lawsuit in the United States, accusing Chinese authorities and institutions of mishandling information about the coronavirus outbreak and contributing to economic damage.

The American state sought financial compensation, arguing that China’s alleged actions had harmed businesses, workers and residents.

The Chinese defendants rejected the accusations and did not participate in the US proceedings.

In response, the Wuhan government and scientific institutions subsequently initiated their own legal action, arguing that Missouri’s allegations and litigation damaged their reputations and caused substantial losses.

Three Current and Former Attorneys General Named

The Chinese lawsuit names Missouri along with three current or former attorneys general.

They include:

• Eric Schmitt: Missouri’s former attorney general, who later became a US senator.
• Andrew Bailey: Another former Missouri attorney general who was involved in the state’s legal action against Chinese entities.
• Catherine Hanaway: Missouri’s current attorney general.

The Chinese plaintiffs allege that these officials were involved in promoting or carrying out legal proceedings and public statements that harmed the reputations of the Wuhan government and associated scientific institutions.

Missouri’s attorney general’s office had not immediately responded to Reuters’ request for comment when the report was published.

Chinese Plaintiffs Demand Compensation and Public Apology

The financial demand is one of the most striking elements of the case.

According to reporting by the South China Morning Post, the Chinese plaintiffs are seeking 356.44 billion yuan in damages, equivalent to approximately $53.44 billion.

In addition to compensation, they want the defendants to stop the alleged defamatory conduct and issue a public apology.

They are also seeking measures to eliminate the alleged negative impact of the statements and restore the reputations of the institutions involved.

However, the demands represent the plaintiffs’ claims and should not be interpreted as a court judgment or an established finding of liability.

Missouri’s Earlier Lawsuit Against China

The dispute has its roots in Missouri’s original COVID-19 lawsuit, which sought to hold Chinese government entities responsible for economic damage associated with the pandemic.

In March 2025, a US federal court entered a substantial judgment in Missouri’s favour after the Chinese defendants did not appear in the proceedings.

The judgment involved billions of dollars in damages and subsequent legal calculations.

The legal dispute has continued beyond that decision, with Missouri pursuing efforts connected to the judgment and Chinese institutions responding through their own proceedings.

The two cases illustrate how disagreements over the pandemic have developed into an extended legal confrontation involving institutions in both countries.

What the Case Means for US-China Relations

The lawsuit arrives at a time when relations between the United States and China remain important to international trade, diplomacy, technology and global security.

Although the case is being handled by a Chinese court, its implications extend beyond the immediate legal claims.

It raises questions about how courts in different countries approach disputes involving foreign governments, public institutions and allegations connected to politically sensitive international events.

The enormous compensation demand could also become a subject of diplomatic discussion, particularly if the proceedings produce further legal developments.

Can China Enforce a Judgment Against a US State?

One major question surrounding the case is whether any eventual Chinese court judgment could realistically be enforced against Missouri or the named American officials.

A ruling by a Chinese court would not automatically become enforceable in the United States.

Recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments depend on applicable domestic laws, jurisdictional requirements and other legal considerations.

The international nature of the dispute could therefore make enforcement complicated, even if the Chinese plaintiffs obtain a favourable decision.

For now, the case remains in the judicial process, and no final ruling on the allegations has been announced.

A Long-Running Legal Dispute Enters Another Chapter

The Wuhan proceedings demonstrate that disagreements surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic continue to generate legal consequences years after the initial global health emergency.

For China, the lawsuit represents an effort by Wuhan authorities and scientific institutions to challenge allegations they consider damaging.

For Missouri, the case is connected to its earlier attempt to obtain compensation from Chinese entities over pandemic-related economic losses.

Whether the latest proceedings result in a meaningful legal outcome or create further diplomatic friction remains uncertain.

As the court process continues, the case is likely to attract international attention because of its extraordinary financial demands and its connection to one of the most consequential global events of the modern era.