Jury returns Monday
Sarah Palin v. New York Times Goes to Jury
Former Republican vice-presidential nominee accused the newspaper of defamation, though judge already has narrowed her claims
Lawyer Kenneth Turkel makes closing arguments near his client, Sarah Palin, right, in federal court in New York on Friday.PHOTO: JANE ROSENBERG/REUTERS
By
Deanna Paul Follow
Updated Feb. 11, 2022 6:12 pm ET
Trial proceedings wrapped up Friday in former Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin’s defamation lawsuit against the New York Times, with a jury set to decide one of the biggest media-law battles in years.
In closing arguments, lawyers for Ms. Palin sought to portray the Times as a newspaper that used its power to disfavor conservatives, while the Times said the former Alaska governor was attempting to seize on a mistake it made in order to undermine important legal protections for a free press.
Ms. Palin filed the lawsuit in response to a 2017 Times editorial about gun violence and political rhetoric, published in the wake of a shooting at a congressional baseball practice. The piece referenced a 2011 shooting that killed six people and wounded then- Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, an Arizona Democrat. It incorrectly suggested that an ad circulated by Ms. Palin’s political-action committee incited the Arizona spree.
The Times, which is owned by New York Times Co. , corrected the editorial within hours, deleting the incitement claim. Ms. Palin sued two weeks later.
Palin lawyer Kenneth Turkel urged a federal jury in Manhattan to hold the Times accountable in a case that he said boiled down to a simple rule: “Don’t say false things.”
Mr. Turkel argued the Times and its then-opinion editor had doggedly advanced a narrative that “demonized the right wing,” part of what he alleged was a pattern at the newspaper.
“All they had to do was dislike her a little less and we’re not sitting here today,” he said.
Times lawyer David Axelrod in response said the case was about an honest mistake that the paper quickly fixed. No one at the Times was trying to push a false narrative or advance a political agenda, Mr. Axelrod said. To the contrary, the Times issued a “fast and broad” correction and tweeted an apology, he said.
“Freedom of the press and freedom of speech are fragile things,” and liability for honest mistakes would lead to an onslaught of litigation and create a chilling effect for newspapers like the Times, he said.
Friday’s closing arguments were a final chapter in a weeklong trialthat offered a rare view into the Times’ fact-checking and publishing processes, with testimony from Times writers, editors and senior leadership.
To prevail, Ms. Palin bears the burden to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the Times and its then-opinion editor, James Bennet, acted with “actual malice,” meaning they either knowingly published a false statement or showed a reckless disregard for the truth.
Her lawsuit sought unspecified damages for reputational or emotional harm, as well as punitive damages, but U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff on Thursday disallowed the latter claim, an early boost for the Times.
No reasonable juror, the judge said, could conclude the editorial was motivated solely by animus and a desire to injure Ms. Palin, as required by law. The decision could significantly limit the size of any monetary award to Ms. Palin if she wins.
“It’s not about money,” Mr. Turkel told jurors, but he said that Ms. Palin was entitled to fair compensation for humiliation and mental anguish.
Mr. Axelrod said Ms. Palin had offered nothing more than vague assertions that she was harmed by the editorial.
Jurors deliberated for about two hours late Friday and then broke for the weekend. They are set to resume Monday morning.
Exc. |
