I think for a public figure, the standard for libel is much higher and there must be an element of ‘actual malice’. Perhaps some freeper lawyers can help here.
However, tortuous interference against Trump’s business would be much easier to win a case on , I think.
Kaisch better be careful.
What do y’all think?
That is true to the best of my knowledge.
I am not a lawyer but I think that "actual malice" is based on foreknowledge that what is being said is a lie and/or a reckless disregard for the truth.
What Trump's lawyer is doing is warning these parties that what they might be saying in an ad is a lie...and that draws in the "foreknowledge of the truth" as well as the "reckless disregard for the truth" issues.
It's not so much a matter of who would win such a suit as it is a warning that such actions might lead to serious legal entanglement.
In warning all opponents to be alert to the use of lies in ads or otherwise, he is raising the "reckless disregard for the truth" issue and putting them on notice that he is willing to defend himself in court.
Very smart move considering the GOPe will try to play dirty. This will give them pause.
I’m not a lawyer but I went to many a lecture on libel and defamation and various other legal issues that applied to publishing.
One thing I remember about “malice” is that it has a different meaning from the everyday meaning when it is used in law.
I hope we DON’T get to watch this play out.