Sarah Palin’s libel lawsuit against the New York Times will reportedly be dismissed by its presiding judge, Judge Jed Rakoff, according to his announcement Monday afternoon. Rakoff stated that Palin had not met the legal standard of demonstrating that the newspaper acted with “actual malice” in publishing an editorial in 2017 that included an inaccurate claim about her.
Palin, 57, a former Alaska governor and John McCain’s running mate in the 2008 election, initially sued the New York Times in 2017.
The lawsuit had claimed that the publication falsely linked her to a 2011 shooting spree in Arizona that killed six and seriously injured then-Rep. Gabby Giffords (D-AZ). Palin’s lawsuit is currently being debated by a Manhattan jury, The Hill reports.
The Times later corrected the article, which stated that an earlier version “incorrectly stated that a link existed between political rhetoric and the 2011 shooting,” noting, “In fact, no such link was established.”
Palin needed to prove malicious intent in court to win her lawsuit against the newspaper. This meant the former Alaska governor was required to demonstrate that the New York Times knew the editorial was false or had a reckless disregard for the truth when the story was printed.
James Bennet, who was the editorial page editor at the New York Times when the story was printed, testified that the error was accidental and the paper did not intend for the wording to suggest Palin was linked to the shooting.
Attorney for the Times David Axelrod, noted to the Court the paper’s public apology. “Evidence will show the Times and Mr. Bennet made a mistake. Evidence will also show this mistake was in no way intentional,” he said in his opening statements earlier this month.
Palin testified she felt the editorial “link[ed her] to inciting the murder of innocent people” and claimed that as a result of the story, there was a noticeable increase in the number of negative comments made toward her. She said it resulted in an influx of threats against her and her family, and that she suffered emotional harm.
“After the editorial, things changed in terms of being called upon to advise,” she alleged, which she called “evidence of a reputation being changed.” Palin is seeking unspecified monetary damages for alleged harm to her reputation.
According to CNN, the jury is currently deliberating the case, and Rakoff will allow them to come to a decision. If the jury finds the Times not liable, the verdict will stand, but if the jury finds the paper liable, he intends to dismiss it.
On Monday, Rakoff presented his findings in court, preparing for when it “inevitably” goes through the appeals process.
“The New York Times welcomes today’s decision,” said a spokesperson for the paper. “It is a reaffirmation of a fundamental tenet of American law: public figures should not be permitted to use libel suits to punish or intimidate news organizations that make, acknowledge and swiftly correct unintentional errors.”
Support our non-profit journalism
