Sarah Palin suit against NY Times still alive: Appeals Court denies Rehearing of Order reinstating case
Lawsuit over false claim that Palin’s 2011 electoral map was connected to the shooting of Gabby Giffords — something the Times repeated in June 2017 even though the claim was known to be false.
When we last checked in Sarah Palin’s lawsuit against the New York Time over false claims that Palin’s 2011 electoral map was connected to the shooting of then congresswoman Gabby Giffords, the lawsuit had been reinstated by a panel of the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, after a trial court dismissal.
For full background on the false claims, the lawsuit, the trial court dismissal, and the 2nd Circuit reinstatement, see our August 6, 2019, post, Sarah Palin defamation lawsuit against NY Times reinstated by appeals court. The Court ruled, in pertinent part:
This case is ultimately about the First Amendment, but the subject matter implicated in this appeal is far less dramatic: rules of procedure and pleading standards. Sarah Palin appeals the dismissal 4 of her defamation complaint against The New York Times (“the Times”) for failure to state a claim. The district court (Rakoff, J.), uncertain as to whether Palin’s complaint plausibly alleged all of the required elements of her defamation claim, held an evidentiary hearing to test the sufficiency of Palin’s pleadings. Following the hearing, and 9 without converting the proceeding to one for summary judgment, the district court relied on evidence adduced at that hearing to dismiss Palin’s complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). We find that the district court erred in relying on facts outside the pleadings to dismiss the complaint. We further conclude that Palin’s Proposed Amended Complaint plausibly states a claim for defamation and may proceed to full discovery.
Subsequently, the Times filed a Petition for Rehearing, and Rehearing En Banc (pdf.) Rehearing en banc would be by the full court, not just the three judges on the original panel. (Side note, The Times was represented by the same lawyers from Ballard Spahr law firm Oberlin College recently hired for its appeal of the Gibson’s Bakery case.) The Times was supported by a coalition of media outlets, who filed an Amicus Brief (pdf.) in support of rehearing.
Along the way, the original panel filed an Amended Opinion (pdf.) It’s not clear to me what was amended, but the result was the same.
A reader recently alerted me that rehearing was denied.
By Order dated November 7, 2019, the 2nd Circuit denied rehearing or rehearing en banc:
Appellee, The New York Times Company, filed a petition for panel rehearing, or, in the alternative, for rehearing en banc. The panel that determined the appeal has considered the request for panel rehearing, and the active members of the Court have considered the request for rehearing en banc.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition is denied.
So the lawsuit goes forward.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
NYT style guidelines advising forming close associations for hits and giggles may yet need to be revised. Social justice for NYT. Justice for Palin. A positive development.
Good.
Have fun in discovery, NYT. Hope Palin’s lawyers ream you.
For the life of me, I cannot fathom how the left can be so utterly, thoroughly, completely, bizarrely, detached from honesty and reality.
HOW do they maintain this insanity? Oh, wait, Dissociative Identity Disorder…. Now it all makes sense….
It has little to do with “reality” as known to most of us, but far more to do with the “reality” of how many diehard leftists the activists have managed to plant in America’s judiciary. They may have over-anticipated in this case, but that won’t last forever. Once they can pack in enough “woke” judges, then all legal questions in the US will be resolved in favor of radical activism, and the Mussolinian Age will dawn in America.
Their only “reality” is BAMN.
George Orwell knew the answer to that:
“Do you realize that the past, starting from yesterday, has been actually abolished? If it survives anywhere, it’s in a few solid objects with no words attached to them, like that lump of glass there. Already we know almost literally nothing about the Revolution and the years before the Revolution. Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book has been rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street and building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And that process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right. I know, of course, that the past is falsified, but it would never be possible for me to prove it, even when I did the falsification myself. After the thing is done, no evidence ever remains. The only evidence is inside my own mind, and I don’t know with any certainty that any other human being shares my memories.”
How dare the media have to play by the same rules as everyone else.
What ever happened to North Jersey Media Corp V Palin? She used one of their 9/11 pictures for a few hours (until told to desist) on one of her websites. They sued her.
I believe the first step is a cease and desist, with which she complied.
I hope she ends up owning the damn commie rag, just so she can shut it down.
What I want to know is are Sarah and Todd still getting divorced? That makes me sad.
I just looked, and the NY Post article mentioned that Sarah Palin had resigned the governship in 2009. I had forgotten about that.
The left effectively took out one of our stars.
Why in hell isn’t Ilhan Omar GONE? She’s got the criminality thing down pat.
Well CTF, we don’t have enough people to file frivolous lawsuits trying to bankrupt ilhan. And she may be protected from having to use personal money to defend herself unlike Sarah Palin as governor.
The governorship of Alaska, and she resigned halfway through? Yeah, what a tough job.
When I read about the divorce, my reaction was: “My God, man, what took you so long?”
I happen to think that Sarah Palin is God’s own screeching airhead and whackjob, but oddly enough that highly jaundiced view of her would make me especially gleeful to see her win the libel case. I can’t possibly think of a more hilarious putdown of the New York Times than to lose to the likes of her. Would they EVER live it down?!
Nice pic of the happy couple with the Ideologically Correct Bag of Chicken Sandwiches, but it might be worthwhile to know that they’re getting divorced. Not that I blame him. If I were married to Sarah Palin, I’d want to spend 6 months of the year clubbing seals to death too.
Which — again — is why I really want her to win that libel suit. It’s plain to see that the NYT defamed her, and that the defamation damages meet the Sullivan standard. I dearly hope (but don’t expect, because connections) that the NYT has to pay damages to an unhinged cartoon character.
Imagine someone who won the Nobel Prize in 1981 and then spent the rest of his life in a downward spiral. He finally is living in a tent underneath a freeway overpass, and in a fit of rage stabs another tent dweller to death. He winds up in a prison cell, and to survive must scrub the floor or his cellmate, he of the 85 I.Q., will kill him.
I’ll leave it to everyone’s imagination to determine who the cellmates are in this drama. LOL
Congratulations on your choice of posting name. Well done and most appropriate.
Thank you. I try. LOL
RandomCrank
Someone might think you are enormously witty clever and entertaining at least one person might think so.
Others might think you are fatuous, condescending and arrogant.
I’ll leave it to everyone’s imagination which applies
Not only that, but a poopy-pants! LOL
If she is successful in her suit, what does that do toward all the other organizations that so thoroughly vilified her over the shooting?
Go Sarah Go!
Future President Sarah Palin!!!!!!!
Her future is on the Women’s Mud Rasslin’ Circuit, which is actually a thing. Once AOC gets thrown out of Congress, I look forward to the matches between them in roadside taverns in the Midwest.
Good Lord-what an inane display of infantilism. Being, clearly, obsessed with a VP candidate from 11 years ago who holds no office or influence is a sign of a desperate need for counselling-seek help
One of Sarah’s best attributes was the way her just being her made left wing heads explode like random self-popping pimples. She was a lot like Trump that way before Trump was. This guy, random crank, is a cratered out pimple.
Oops, sorry clicked the downvote by accident.
Was going to say yes, she does make the progs heads explode. You can always tell a leftwing commie prog by their reaction to Ms. Palin.
I hope for the best for her, but her prospects in a jury trial against the Times in Manhattan seem dubious at best. But, if she can win there, she can win anywhere, to borrow from the song.