Sarah Palin’s defamation suit against NY Times set for trial

FAN Editor

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin tested positive for COVID-19 on a home test kit, just as she was due in court for the start of a defamation lawsuit against The New York Times

The positive test was announced in court by U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff, who said that Palin was being tested again to determine whether the trial goes forward or is delayed.

Palin, a one-time Republican vice presidential nominee, has had COVID-19 before. She’s urged people not to get vaccinated, telling an audience in Arizona last month that “it will be over my dead body that I’ll have to get a shot.”

Palin, 57, sued the Times in 2017, claiming the Times damaged her reputation with an opinion piece penned by its editorial board that falsely asserted her political rhetoric helped incite the 2011 shooting of then-Arizona U.S. Rep. Gabby Giffords. The newspaper has conceded the initial wording of the editorial was flawed, but not in an intentional or reckless way that made it libelous.

Her case survived an initial dismissal that was reversed on appeal in 2019, setting the stage for a rare instance that a major news organization will have to defend itself before a jury in a libel case involving a major public figure.

It’s presumed that Palin will be the star witness in the civil case, taking the stand to back up accusations that the Times should pay damages for hurting her budding career as a political commentator. There was no response to messages left last week with her lawyers asking if and when she will testify.

In the editorial, the Times wrote that, before the 2011 mass shooting that severely wounded Giffords and killed six others, Palin’s political action committee circulated a map of electoral districts that put Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized crosshairs.

In a correction two days later, The Times said the editorial had “incorrectly stated that a link existed between political rhetoric and the 2011 shooting” and that it had “incorrectly described” the map.

The disputed wording had been added to the editorial by James Bennet, then the editorial page editor. At trial, a jury would have to decide whether he acted with “actual malice,” meaning that he knew what he wrote was false, or with “reckless disregard” for the truth.

In pretrial testimony, Bennet cited deadline pressures as he explained that he did not personally research the information about Palin’s political action committee before approving the editorial’s publication. He said he believed the editorial was accurate when it was published.

Free America Network Articles

Leave a Reply

Next Post

Italy’s presidential vote begins with Draghi’s future in balance

The League party leader Matteo Salvini casts a vote at the Chamber of Deputies to elect the country’s new president in Rome, Italy, January 24, 2022. REUTERS/Yara Nardi/Pool January 24, 2022 By Gavin Jones and Angelo Amante ROME (Reuters) -The leaders of Italy’s main political parties met on Monday to […]

You May Like