Sarah Palin's Defamation Lawsuit Against The New York Times Returns to Court
Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin's long-running defamation claims against The New York Times have been revived and are now being heard by a fresh Manhattan jury. The case, which dates back eight years, was restored by an appeals court last year after previous judicial rulings went against the Republican figure.
The Core Allegations and Legal Arguments
Palin asserts that The New York Times defamed her in a 2017 editorial that falsely linked her campaign rhetoric to a mass shooting. According to her legal team, the newspaper engaged in what attorney Shane Vogt described as a "sickeningly familiar pattern" of targeting prominent Republican personalities.
The Times acknowledges making an error in the editorial but maintains it corrected the record promptly. Attorney Felicia Ellsworth emphasized during opening statements that the correction was posted within fourteen hours and was communicated "as loudly, clearly and quickly as possible."
Background of the Controversial Editorial
The disputed editorial was published following the 2017 shooting of U.S. Representative Steve Scalise during a congressional baseball practice. The Times suggested that before the 2011 Arizona shooting that injured former Representative Gabby Giffords, Palin's political action committee had contributed to an atmosphere of violence through a map placing Giffords and other Democrats under stylized crosshairs.
In its correction, The New York Times stated the editorial had "incorrectly stated that a link existed between political rhetoric and the 2011 shooting" and had "incorrectly described" the map in question.
Legal History and Appellate Revival
Palin originally sued The New York Times for unspecified damages in 2017, claiming the editorial damaged her career as a political commentator. The case took a significant turn when Judge Jed S. Rakoff rejected Palin's claims in February 2022 while a jury was still deliberating. The jury subsequently delivered a verdict against Palin.
However, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan restored the lawsuit last year, finding that Judge Rakoff's dismissal had improperly intruded on the jury's work. The appellate court cited multiple flaws in the original trial, including erroneous exclusion of evidence, inaccurate jury instructions, and mistaken responses to jury questions.
Current Trial Proceedings and Implications
During the current trial, lawyers for both parties are presenting testimony and exhibits detailing the creation and subsequent correction of the 2017 editorial. Jurors must determine whether The New York Times editors knew they were publishing false information and proceeded regardless.
The outcome could have significant implications for defamation law and media accountability, particularly regarding political figures and editorial corrections. The trial represents a renewed opportunity for Palin to seek damages for what she claims was career-harming defamation.
