Everything Else About The Palin Suit Was A Waste Of Time, So Why Not Its Ending?
A very predictable conclusion muddied by an honest attempt at efficiency.
(Photo by T.J. Kirkpatrick/Getty Images)
The Wall Street Journal branded the New York Times defense strategy in the Sarah Palin defamation case as the “oops” defense. It’s almost as if some corners of the right-wing commentariat had convinced themselves that former Masked Singer contestant Sarah Palin had an Alaskan snowball’s chance in hell of winning this facially flawed lawsuit. Which, of course, she didn’t because the defamation framework surrounding public figures is abundantly clear.
Or… maybe she does have a minuscule chance of winning, but certainly not at this stage of the proceedings.
How Transactional Lawyers Can Better Serve (And Maintain) Their Clients
Judge Jed Rakoff informed the parties that he’ll be issuing judgment in favor of the Times notwithstanding whatever verdict the jury may reach. This doesn’t really come as a surprise because the Sullivan case always made it near impossible to imagine Palin could successfully articulate a case that a jury could even rule on. And so… judgment notwithstanding the verdict it is.
In this case, Judge Rakoff means “notwithstanding” literally because the poor jurors are still toiling away in deliberations despite the rest of the world knowing that their efforts are mostly a waste of time.
Of course they’re only “mostly” a waste of time. If some future appellate decision overrules the judge’s decision it’s better to have a verdict in hand than have to force everyone to sit through another trial and have Palin reinfect New Yorkers with the plague.
Could a future appellate court do that? Sure, though it’s a move that would require a massive rewriting of constitutional law. But it’s a rewrite that Thomas and Gorsuch seem willing to pursue so it’s not impossible. Palin’s lawyers presumably entered this case knowing that it wasn’t going to be won or lost at trial, but in convincing the Supreme Court to take a hatchet to the First Amendment.
Sponsored
AI’s Impact On Law Firms Of Every Size
Law Firms Now Have A Choice In Their Document Comparison Software
The Business Case For AI At Your Law Firm
Law Firms Now Have A Choice In Their Document Comparison Software
If that happens months or years down the road, the SDNY would still have a workable verdict to lean on. On paper, Judge Rakoff’s covering all his bases and improving judicial efficiency.
Unfortunately, the jury isn’t sequestered so there’s a non-zero chance they’re going to figure out that they’re useless, tainting the deliberations, and putting us back at square one needing a new trial. He could have just sat on this ruling until the jury wrapped up and avoided all the rigmarole. Or had the jury sequestered from the start.
Though, as is, the decision is the perfect metaphor for a case that’s amounted to a giant waste of time from the start.
So the case will plod forward. Maybe the Supreme Court will get a chance to obliterate six decades of constitutional precedent. But for now, this case ended as it always should have, with a curt dismissal as a matter of law and attorneys heading back to the office to draft the appeal.
Judge throws out Palin libel case against New York Times [Politico]
Sponsored
Generative AI In Legal Work — What’s Fact And What’s Fiction?
How Transactional Lawyers Can Better Serve (And Maintain) Their Clients
Joe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.
