Jury Rules Against Sarah Palin in Critical Defamation Case

A federal jury delivered its verdict on Tuesday in Sarah Palin’s defamation lawsuit against The New York Times.

The outcome is a setback for the polarizing former Alaska governor.

Palin, a prominent Republican, sued the Times over a 2017 editorial, according to NPR.

She claimed it falsely linked her campaign rhetoric to a 2011 mass shooting in Arizona.

The editorial, titled “America’s Lethal Politics,” made the erroneous connection. Palin argued it damaged her reputation and career as a political figure.

The piece wrongly tied Palin’s political action committee to the shooting. She sought to hold the Times accountable for what she saw as a smear, per Politico.

To win, Palin needed to prove the Times acted with “reckless disregard” for the truth. This “actual malice” standard is a high bar for public figures in defamation cases.

The jury ruled in favor of the Times after a retrial. They found no evidence that the Times published the editorial with actual malice, a sentiment echoed by Felicia Ellsworth, an attorney for the Gray Lady.

“There’s not been one shred of evidence showing anything other than an honest mistake,” she said.

Kenneth Turkel, an attorney for Palin, was less than thrilled with the lack of “accountability.”

“To this day, there been no accountability,” he said. “That’s why we’re here.”

The Times issued a correction shortly after the 2017 editorial ran. This quick response likely influenced the jury’s decision in their favor.

The retrial was ordered by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Palin’s initial 2022 loss was overturned due to procedural errors in the first trial.

The 2022 trial had issues that the appeals court deemed unfair. Palin was given a second chance to make her case against the Times.

Despite the retrial, Palin couldn’t meet the “reckless disregard” standard. The jury’s verdict reaffirmed the challenges of proving malice in such cases.

The verdict highlights the steep legal hurdles any conservative faces against the establishment media. Even public figures like Palin struggle to win defamation cases.

The outcome may fuel GOP calls to reform defamation laws.

Many in the party argue the “actual malice” standard unfairly protects outlets like the Times.

The ongoing battle between the establishment media and conservatives seems unlikely to fade away anytime soon.

Palin’s case brought attention to media overreach against conservatives. Her fight exposed the Times’ error, even if the jury didn’t rule in her favor.

Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.