Former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin speaks at a rally in September 2017, in Montgomery, Ala. Her battle against New York Times continue on Thursday.
Brynn Anderson / AP
hide captions
switch captions
Brynn Anderson / AP
Former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin speaks at a rally in September 2017, in Montgomery, Ala. Her battle against New York Times continue on Thursday.
Brynn Anderson / AP
NEW YORK – Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin will return on Thursday in a New York City courtroom more than a week after the start of a trial in the libel lawsuit New York Times was postponed because she tested positive for COVID-19.
The trial will begin in the morning in federal court in Manhattan, where Palin will be the lead witness. She is seeking unspecified damages based on claims that an editorial in Times compromised her budding career as a political commentator.
A judge suspended the trial last week to give the unvaccinated Palin time to get over any possible symptoms. In her absence from court, she caused a stir when she was caught dining out at an upscale Manhattan restaurant twice, both before and after her positive test results were made public.
Palin, 57, has publicly said she will not be shot.
The Republican defamation case persisted after the original recall was overturned on appeal in 2019, setting the stage for a rare case that a major news organization would have to defend itself. against libelous statements regarding a public figure.
Palin sued Times in 2017, accusing it of damaging her reputation with an editorial on gun control published after US Louisiana Representative Steve Scalise, also a Republican, was injured. when a man with a history of anti-GOP activism opened fire on a congressional baseball team practice in Washington.
In the editorial, Times wrote that prior to the 2011 mass shooting in an Arizona supermarket parking lot that left former U.S. Representative Gabby Giffords fatally injured and killed six others, Palin’s political action committee circulated a map of constituencies placing Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized crosses.
In the fix two days later, Time said the editorial “incorrectly claimed there was a connection between political rhetoric and the 2011 shooting” and that it “incorrectly depicts” the map.
The controversial wording was added to the editorial by James Bennet, then editor of the editorial site. At trial, the jury will have to decide whether he acted with “genuine malice,” meaning he knew what he wrote was untrue or with “reckless disregard.” “for the truth.
Bennet has said that he believed the editorial was accurate when it was published.
