A judge ruled Sarah Palin’s libel lawsuit filed against the New York Times over a 2017 editorial should be rejected because her legal counsel did not produce evidence the publication knew what it wrote about her was false.
Judge Jed Rakoff of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York issued his ruling as jury deliberations were still ongoing over Palin’s lawsuit, which alleges the Times defamed her by erroneously linking her to a 2011 shooting that injured six people and gravely wounded then-Rep. Gabby Giffords.
Rakoff said he would dismiss the complaint but not before the jury comes to its conclusion, noting an appeal is likely forthcoming.
NEW YORK TIMES JOURNALISM PRACTICES DRAW SCRUTINY IN SARAH PALIN LIBEL TRIAL
The judge’s decision on Monday comes nearly five years after he threw out the former Alaska governor’s lawsuit on the motion to dismiss. At the time, the judge argued it was a case of negligent journalism and not a case of knowing falsehood that a public figure must prove with evidence.
Attorneys for Palin told jurors on Feb. 3, “We are not here trying to win your votes for Gov. Palin or any of her policies,” arguing the outlet committed libel with “actual malice” and damaged her burgeoning career as a political commentator.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
The New York Times’s editorial asserted a 2010 map released by Palin’s political action committee, which featured stylized crosshairs over 20 Democratic House districts, held a connection to the January 2011 shooting. The New York Times amended the editorial within two days, noting no direct connection between the shooting and Palin’s ad.
Corrections were added by James Bennet, the former editorial page editor, saying the outlet had “incorrectly stated that a link existed between the political rhetoric and the 2011 shooting” and that it “incorrectly described” the map.
