Some time ago, we covered Judge Singhal's grant of summary judgment to CNN in the defamation lawsuit filed against the network by Alan Dershowitz. The 11th Circuit just drove another nail into the lawsuit's coffin, affirming that order. The Court held there was no evidence that the reporters had spoken with actual malice (to the contrary, the Court noted that the evidence indicated that the reporters believed in the truth of their statements).
Perhaps more interesting, though, were the concurring opinions, written by Judges Lagoa and Wilson, which discussed the New York Times Co. v. Sullivan standard applicable to defamation cases. In short, Judge Lagoa doesn't like it, Judge Wilson does.
Opinion here.
2 comments:
What was Dershowitz's point anyway? Was it that withholding monies from Ukraine that had been appropriated unless Ukraine announced an investigation into Biden (which would help Trump's electoral chances) was not a crime because Trump verily believed his winning an election was a good thing and thus there is insufficient criminal motive?
Judge Wilson likes abiding by precedent. The rule of law doesn’t really benefit from the whiplash this SCOTUS is handing out by tossing out precedent after precedent. The hubris it takes to say that all those justices have been wrong. And only this current crew can say what the law is. Sound familiar?
Post a Comment