<mediadc-video-embed data-state="{"cms.site.owner":{"_ref":"00000161-3486-d333-a9e9-76c6fbf30000","_type":"00000161-3461-dd66-ab67-fd6b93390000"},"cms.content.publishDate":1654094800296,"cms.content.publishUser":{"_ref":"0000017d-00b6-db7d-abfd-7cb766d10000","_type":"00000161-3461-dd66-ab67-fd6b933a0007"},"cms.content.updateDate":1654094800296,"cms.content.updateUser":{"_ref":"0000017d-00b6-db7d-abfd-7cb766d10000","_type":"00000161-3461-dd66-ab67-fd6b933a0007"},"rawHtml":"
var _bp = _bp||[]; _bp.push({ "div": "Brid_54032183", "obj": {"id":"27789","width":"16","height":"9","video":"1023194"} }); ","_id":"00000181-1fbb-db34-a5d5-9fbfa1290000","_type":"2f5a8339-a89a-3738-9cd2-3ddf0c8da574"}”>Video EmbedA judge strongly rebuffed Sarah Palin‘s bid for a new trial in her defamation case against the New York Times.
Palin’s case was “wholly lacking in merit,” U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff wrote in a ruling Tuesday, dashing Palin’s hopes of reviving her case against the outlet after a jury determined in February she failed to prove her case.
“In a defamation case brought by a public figure like Sarah Palin, a mistake is not enough to win if it was not motivated by actual malice,” Rakoff wrote. “And the striking thing about the trial here was that Palin, for all her earlier assertions, could not, in the end, introduce even a speck of such evidence. Palin’s motion is hereby denied in its entirety.”
SARAH PALIN SEEKS NEW TRIAL AGAINST NEW YORK TIMES, JUDGE SAYS
Lawyers for Palin asked Rakoff, who oversaw her prior libel case, to disqualify himself as a judge in the case or grant a new trial, arguing he harbored biases against her and raising questions about how he interacted with the jury. He rejected those pleas.
“In actuality, none of these was erroneous, let alone a basis for granting Palin a new trial,” he wrote.
The outlet celebrated the ruling.
“We are pleased to see the court’s decision, and remain confident that the judge and jury decided the case fairly and correctly,” New York Times spokesman Charlie Stadtlander said in a statement after the ruling.
Palin sued the New York Times in 2017 over an editorial that tied her campaign to a mass shooting in 2011 that killed six people and wounded 13, notably former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ), without evidence. The outlet issued a correction to the editorial shortly after it was published.
The former vice presidential candidate has stressed that the editorial harmed her reputation but struggled to overcome a precedent, established in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, which stipulates an “actual malice” standard for defamation suits against public figures. Lawyers for the outlet insisted the paper made an “honest mistake.”
Rakoff, who sits on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, oversaw that case and preempted the jury, announcing he would dismiss the case shortly before the jury made its decision. He pledged to dismiss her lawsuit even if the jury sided with her. The jury announced its decision the following day, agreeing with Rakoff that Palin failed to prove that the outlet acted with malice when it disseminated false information about her.
Following that decision, Palin’s legal team announced plans to challenge the ruling. Her team cited Rakoff’s preemptive announcement as grounds for an appeal. In the wake of Rakoff’s most recent decision Tuesday, Palin has the option to try to take her case to the appeals courts.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
The Washington Examiner reached out to Palin’s legal team for comment.
Palin joined the race for Alaska’s at-large congressional seat last April following the death of Rep. Don Young (R-AK). She is facing a crowded field of dozens of candidates.
