The New York Times’ opinion editor knew that former vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin didn’t incite the shooting of then-Rep. Gabby Giffords but suggested it anyway, a Palin attorney argued in opening statements of her libel re-trial against the newspaper Tuesday.
Under US Supreme Court precedent, Palin must show the Times engaged in “actual malice” by acting with a reckless disregard for the truth or knowing their information was wrong but running it anyway.
While the trial is a rematch versus editor James Bennet and the paper, she has new material this time. The US Court of Appeals for the Second ...
Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading:
See Breaking News in Context
Bloomberg Law provides trusted coverage of current events enhanced with legal analysis.
Already a subscriber?
Log in to keep reading or access research tools and resources.