HMM: Judge Tosses Sarah Palin’s Defamation Case Against New York Times.

A federal judge on Monday threw out a defamation case brought by former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin against The New York Times over an editorial the paper published in 2017.

The editorial, titled “America’s Lethal Politics,” had incorrectly connected Palin to the 2011 mass shooting that left six people dead and Rep. Gabby Giffords (D-Ariz.) seriously wounded. The onetime Republican vice presidential nominee claims the editorial damaged her reputation and is seeking compensation in New York federal court.

As the jury was deliberating on Monday, U.S. District Court Judge Jed Rakoff ruled that Palin’s suit should be tossed because her legal team failed to produce substantial evidence that the paper knowingly and recklessly published false information about her.

Despite his ruling, Rakoff told the jury to keep deliberating to a verdict, and noted that an appeal in the case was very likely.

Still, the case could have broader impacts on press freedoms. In a country where defamation cases between public figures and major news outlets rarely go to trial, Palin’s case could end up having crucial implications for freedom of the press. If she appeals and the case makes its way to the Supreme Court, the justices could potentially revisit a bedrock legal precedent.

See, it’s not just a legal precedent, it’s a bedrock legal precedent, because it’s good for the press.

Related: Rethinking Libel for the Twenty-First Century.

UPDATE: This is great for me, because if my article is going to have an impact on appellate courts, there has to be an appeal. And Judge Rakoff has pretty much guaranteed that there will be an appeal. Thanks, Jed!