2024-08-28 -Lurid Crime Tales-
|
Sarah Palin's Defamation Suit Against New York Times Revived by Second Circuit Court
|
[PJMedia] Defamation isn't always easy to prove in court. If it were, the New York Times and the Washington Post would be launching GoFundMe pages and holding bake sales to pay off their legal bills. Most prominent Republican candidates and politicians probably have at least a dozen legitimate defamation lawsuits against various mainstream media outlets that they'd file right away if they had a decent chance of winning.
With publications like the Times and WaPo, the line between editorial opinion and journalism was obliterated years ago. They're not news organizations, they're one big op-ed. The editorial boards of both use their respective opinion sections to launch attack narratives that will, more often than not, be reinforced by their "journalists."
Prior to the political ascent of Donald Trump, Sarah Palin had been the most maliciously maligned Republican for years. In 2017 — nine years after she'd been on the GOP presidential ticket — Palin had had enough and decided to take the New York Times to court. Palin failed in that effort but is now getting a chance for a new trial.
The New York Post:
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Palin can try again to prove that the Times should be liable for a 2017 editorial that incorrectly linked her to a mass shooting six years earlier that killed six people and seriously wounded Democratic U.S. congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords.
Lawyers for Palin argued that U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff, who oversaw the February 2022 trial, wrongly excluded evidence of the Times’ actual malice and wrongly instructed jurors to disregard some of that evidence.
A judge putting his thumb on the scale during a trial to be unfair to a hated Republican? Who ever heard of such a thing?!?!?
Again, defamation suits are an uphill battle. Sarah Palin and her legal team may have a dual purpose here, however.
More from the Post:
Media critics, and Palin herself, have viewed the case as a possible vehicle to overturn New York Times v. Sullivan, the landmark 1964 U.S. Supreme Court decision that set a high bar for public figures to prove defamation.
It's a safe bet that the Times wasn't running opinion pieces about the desperate need to change the Supreme Court back then.
|
Posted by DarthVader 2024-08-28 15:36||
||
Front Page|| [11134 views ]
Top
|
Posted by Lord Garth 2024-08-28 20:47||
2024-08-28 20:47||
Front Page
Top
|
|
17:49 Grom the Affective
17:19 Abu Uluque
17:04 Abu Uluque
17:02 swksvolFF
16:48 Grom the Affective
16:46 Grom the Affective
16:46 Mullah Richard
16:05 swksvolFF
15:26 Procopius2k
15:23 NN2N1
14:59 Pancho Poodle8452
14:52 Rambler
14:51 Grom the Affective
14:41 Elmerert Hupens2660
14:31 Regular joe
14:28 trailing wife
14:25 magpie
14:18 Elmerert Hupens2660
14:14 Regular joe
14:10 Super Hose
14:08 Super Hose
14:08 Regular joe
14:02 Super Hose
14:01 trailing wife









|