Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin has filed a defamation suit against the "New York Times." Just days after the Washington D.C. shooting that seriously wounded Republican Rep. Steve Scalise, the liberal newspaper published a piece that attempted to claim Palin incited the 2011 shooting of Gabby Giffords. Palin's suit claims that the New York Times "violated the law and its own policies."
While what the "New York Times" said may have been false, it's nearly impossible for someone like Palin to win a defamation suit. Under the law, Palin has become someone who took the role of special prominence in the affairs of society, making it harder for her to win a defamation case.
According to the First Amendment and the Supreme Court, the statement must show "actual malice," or, in this case, prove that the "New York Times" statement was published with either knowledge or complete disregard of whether it was true or false.
The court has raised the bar higher for celebrities and politicians. Negligence or just failing to investigate will not establish actual malice. Palin's suit alleges that the "New York Times" knew when it published the article in question. She even cited "New York Times" articles that showed that there was no connection between Palin and the 2011 shooting.
The "New York Times" did issue a retraction, but that will not protect them, according to New York laws. The first retraction and correction is believed to be read as saying there is still a connection between Palin and the 2011 shooting, but she was not connected to political incitement.
The only protection for the "New York Times" is a retraction that is placed near the front of the paper and shows a sincere attempt at repairing damage caused by the article. If they only fix part of the wrongful impression and leave "offensive" parts intact, the retraction will not be accepted under the law.
It is possible for Palin to show that the original article was wrong and that the retractions were incomplete or that they left "offensive" pieces of it, this could help her case and possibly lead her to win the suit.
Palin becomes the latest victim in the media's attempt at attacking public figures without any evidence to back up their claims. Liberal media pundits have attacked Trump. CNN ran a story that they knew was not true and that led to several employees to resign. Trump has even been vocal about opening up the libel laws and coming after journalists who make false claims about him and other politicians.
Perhaps those laws that Trump speaks of would be very helpful to Palin right about now.
