The story omits the judge's name.
So the judge does this while the country’s attention is focused on Hurricane Harvey. IMPEACH HIM!
What judge? A Clinton or Obama appointee working in collusion? I assume she can appeal this.
Time to amend the Constitution, removing lifetime appointments for Federal judges, and this ridiculous “actual malice” standard for a biased, editorializing “press” that has no responsibility for accurate reporting and character assassination
Oh, and a movement needs to begin to remove so called “activist” judges
Let me guess, the public wasn’t interested enough in the case? Was there no prosecutor willing to take the case?
Our justice system is starting to look like a joke.
I would not be surprised if the Judge was bribed or a hard core Leftist.
Not a surprise. The Supreme Court has given the media nearly insurmountable First Amendment protections from defamation suits.
She has my appreciation and my thanks for pushing back.
Leni
Fomr the Wikipedia article on this idiot judge, who was appointed by Bill Clinton:
“Rolling Stone magazine Matt Taibbi wrote in 2011, “Federal judge Jed Rakoff, a former prosecutor with the U.S. Attorney’s office here in New York, is fast becoming a sort of legal hero of our time.”[19]”
Judge Jed Rakoff
However, the Times' defense (in effect, "we're not liable because we're too stupid and lazy to check through our our own files") is nonsensical.
Hopefully she'll appeal. Eventually to the Supreme Court if necessary.
That wasn't a mistake. It was deliberately done to hurt Palin, and that's the difference.
I assume she'll appeal and this was probably not unexpected.
Anyone who believes politics doesn’t enter the judiciary is a moron. Rule of Law and the Constitution no longer matters.
No. This should either go to a jury trial or be settled out of court. Justice has not been served.
The media can not be allowed to destroy people’s reputations at will (even though they do it all the time) without knowing they can be held liable.
The NY Slimes should just pay Sarah $10 Million with a contract of silence on the details of the settlement.
Let’s put all the anger and vitriol aside.
The court of appeals can easily reverse this decision, as it was very wrong and “early.”
As just one example, the ruling found fault in the Complaint in that Plain did not name specific person as the one who made the decision to defame her. Ms. Palin did not sit in on the editorial meetings that approved the libelous writing, so there was no way she could have known. It was also information obtainable on Discovery.
Secondly, in a greater sense, the judge has sent himself as the Trier of Fact. He is not. The judge is the Trier of Law, the jury is the Trier of Fact.
This case should, and will, go to a jury.
” Judge Jed S. Rakoff of Federal District Court in Manhattan said in his ruling. “Negligence this may be; but defamation of a public figure it plainly is not.”
From the article in the NYT.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/29/business/media/sarah-palin-lawsuit-new-york-times.html
Judge Jed Rakoff is a Bill Clinton appointee. What more could you expect?