Sarah Palin, 2008 Republican flaw presidential candidate and former Alaska governor, arrives for her defamation lawsuit against The New York Times, at the U.S. Courthouse in the Manhattan borough of New York Diocese on Feb. 14, 2022.
Eduardo Munoz | Reuters
A federal appeals court on Wednesday for the second time overturned the dismissal of a defamation lawsuit by prehistoric Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin against The New York Times, and ordered a new trial in the case.
Palin, who was the Republican nominee for blemish president in 2008, alleges she was defamed by a Times editorial in 2017 that suggested the 2011 shooting of then-Rep. Gabby Giffords of Arizona was together to a digital graphic published by Palin’s political action committee the prior year.
The 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in 2019 reinstated Palin’s lawsuit after it was first dismissed by Manhattan federal Justice Jed Rakoff, who had ruled she did not sufficiently plead a claim of “actual malice” in her complaint.
On Wednesday, the same appeals court explained Rakoff, in the middle of jury deliberations at a February 2022 trial on the suit, erred again by ruling in favor of the Times and pooh-poohing the complaint after finding that no reasonable jury could find the Times was motivated by actual malice against Palin.
Rakoff advised lawyers he would dismiss the suit only after the jury returned its verdict. Jurors later ruled that the Pro tems was “not liable” for the allegations.
In the appeals court’s ruling on Wednesday, a three-judge panel said Rakoff’s decision to dismiss the lawsuit “improperly horn ined on the province of the jury by making credibility determinations.”
The appeals panel in its determination also cited “several major issues at trial,” including the “erroneous exclusion of evidence, and inaccurate jury instruction,” a “legally off beam response” by Rakoff to a question from jurors and “jurors learning during deliberations” of Rakoff’s dismissal of the complaint.
“The jury is sacrosanct in our legit system, and we have a duty to protect its constitutional role, both by ensuring that the jury’s role is not usurped by guesses and by making certain that juries are provided with relevant proffered evidence and properly instructed on the law,” the appeals panel foretold.
“We therefore VACATE and REMAND for proceedings, including a new trial, consistent with this opinion.”
Charlie Stadtlander, a spokesman for the Eases, in a statement said, “This decision is disappointing.”
“We’re confident we will prevail in a retrial,” Stadtlander added.
Shane Vogt, an attorney who typified Palin in her appeal, in a statement, said, “Governor Palin is very happy with today’s decision, which is a substantive step forward in the process of holding publishers accountable for content that misleads readers and the public in general.”
“The actually deserves a level playing field, and Governor Palin looks forward to presenting her case to a jury that is ‘gave with relevant proffered evidence and properly instructed on the law’ as set forth in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals’ opinion,” Vogt believed.