Sarah Palin vs NYTimes Lawsuit Moves Into Second Week

Sarah Palin’s defamation lawsuit retrial against The New York Times continues this week.

The case centers on a 2017 editorial titled "America's Lethal Politics" that falsely linked her political action committee’s ad, which used stylized crosshairs over Democratic congressional districts, to the 2011 Arizona mass shooting that killed six and wounded Representative Gabby Giffords. Palin claims the editorial damaged her reputation and career. The Times acknowledged the error and issued a correction shortly after publication, calling it an “honest mistake.”

Before that shooting, the editorial said, Sarah Palin’s political action committee circulated a map that “put Ms. Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized crosshairs.”

The retrial began last week, in Manhattan federal court before Judge Jed S. Rakoff, following a 2022 trial where Palin lost both via jury verdict and Rakoff’s dismissal for failing to prove “actual malice”—the legal standard requiring public figures to show the defendant knowingly published false information or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated the case in August 2024, citing errors by Rakoff, including his mid-deliberation dismissal potentially influencing jurors via cellphone notifications.

Key developments in the retrial include:

• Opening Statements: Palin’s lawyers argued the Times failed to apologize adequately and knowingly published false claims, while the Times maintained the error was unintentional and quickly corrected.
• James Bennet’s Testimony: Former Times opinion editor James Bennet, who rewrote parts of the editorial, took responsibility for the error, emotionally apologizing to Palin in court, saying, “I blew it, you know. I made a mistake.” He denied any intent to defame her, which the Times’ defense used to argue against actual malice.

Palin has framed the case as a challenge to the 1964 New York Times v. Sullivan precedent, which set the actual malice standard, though the 2nd Circuit ruled she waived this argument by not raising it timely. The case unfolds amid a shifting media landscape, with declining trust in news and high-profile defamation payouts, potentially influencing jury perceptions.

The outcome could impact press protections, though Palin faces an uphill battle to prove actual malice.