CNN hosts and executives are terrified.
The network fears a moment of reckoning.
And Sarah Palin will head to the Supreme Court with one case that could ruin CNN.
As American Patriot Daily reports:
Bill Clinton appointee U.S. Judge Jed S. Rakoff controversially dismissed Sarah Palin’s defamation lawsuit against The New York Times.
What made Judge Rakoff’s decision bizarre was the fact that the jury was in the middle of deliberations on the case.
Judge Rakoff dismissed the case claiming Palin had not met the standard of proving the Times acted with actual malice in a 2017 editorial that falsely claimed a link between a map on the website of her political action committee and a deranged lunatic that shot Arizona Democrat Congresswoman Gabby Giffords back in 2011.
“The Supreme Court made that balance and set a very high standard and I don’t think that standard has been realized by plaintiff with respect to at least one aspect of the actual malice requirement,” Judge Rakoff wrote. “I don’t think a reasonable juror could conclude that Mr. Bennet either knew the statements were false or that he thought the statements were false and he recklessly disregarded that high probability.
“That places the burden very much on the plaintiff in these situations,” Judge Rakoff continued. “In this case, the court finds that that standard has not been met.”
Judge Rakoff did add that he knew Palin’s lawyers would file an immediate appeal.
The actual malice standard for public figures to prove defamation arose out of the 1964 New York Times v. Sullivan Supreme Court case.
In recent months conservative Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch expressed a willingness to revisit the Sullivan precedent.
Justice Thomas attacked the decision as the liberal Warren Court imposing their policy preferences on the nation while pretending it was constitutional law.
“New York Times and the court’s decisions extending it were policy-driven decisions masquerading as constitutional law,” Justice Thomas argued.
Justice Thomas added that prior to the Sullivan decision states ably handled libel laws while protecting free speech.
“We did not begin meddling in this area until 1964, nearly 175 years after the First Amendment was ratified,” Justice Thomas wrote. “The states are perfectly capable of striking an acceptable balance between encouraging robust public discourse and providing a meaningful remedy for reputational harm.”
Conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch also signaled he was ready to scrap Sullivan.
This case was bound for the Supreme Court from the get-go.
Sarah Palin hired lawyers whose goal was to hold corporate media outlets accountable for defaming conservatives without facing any consequences.
The goal of this case from the start was to challenge the Sullivan standard at the Supreme Court.
And that is exactly what appears to be on track to happening.