A federal jury has determined that the New York Times did not defame former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin in a 2017 editorial, marking another chapter in an ongoing legal battle for the politician. The jury reached this conclusion after approximately two hours of deliberation, following closing arguments from both sides during a civil trial in Manhattan.
In a statement, a representative for the New York Times expressed gratitude to the jurors for their thoughtful consideration. The representative emphasized that the verdict upholds a critical principle of American law: publishers should not be held liable for honest mistakes.
Palin, who gained national recognition as the vice presidential candidate alongside John McCain in 2008, has been pursuing this lawsuit since 2017. She claimed that an editorial falsely connected her to a tragic shooting incident in 2011 that injured then-Representative Gabby Giffords and resulted in the deaths of six individuals. That original editorial was published after a separate mass shooting at a Republican congressional baseball practice in 2017 that severely injured Representative Steve Scalise.
The publication acknowledged its error in the following issue, and James Bennet, the former editorial page editor, took responsibility for the mistake, even offering a heartfelt apology to Palin during the trial.
This ruling marks the second time a jury has sided with the New York Times in this case. In 2022, a previous jury had already ruled in favor of the publication after a U.S. District Court judge dismissed the case, stating that an appeals court would benefit from a jury’s verdict despite his initial ruling.
There is no word yet from Palin’s team regarding a possible appeal of the latest decision. The legal battle has raised important questions about freedom of the press and the responsibilities that come with it, making it a closely watched case in the U.S. legal landscape.
