A federal judge has rejected Sarah Palin's request for a third trial in her libel lawsuit against the New York Times, effectively ending an eight-year legal battle that became a cause célèbre for media critics on the right.
Judge Jed Rakoff also refused Palin's request that he recuse himself from the case, noting in his written opinion that the trial transcript shows he "frequently ruled in Palin's favor" during proceedings. The former Alaska governor and vice presidential candidate had argued she deserved yet another shot after two juries already found in the newspaper's favor.
The lawsuit stemmed from a 2017 Times editorial about gun control, published after the shooting of Republican congressman Steve Scalise. The editorial incorrectly suggested a link between Palin's political action committee and the 2011 shooting of Rep. Gabby Giffords. The Times corrected the article within 14 hours of publication.
Former Times editorial page editor James Bennet tearfully apologized to Palin during this year's trial, testifying that he was "tormented" by the error and worked urgently to fix it after readers complained. But being wrong isn't the same as being malicious, and Palin couldn't clear the high bar set by the Supreme Court's 1964 New York Times v. Sullivan decision, which requires public figures to prove a publisher acted with "actual malice" — knowing the statement was false or showing reckless disregard for the truth.
The first jury ruled against Palin in 2022. An appeals court ordered a new trial after Judge Rakoff said, mid-deliberation, that he planned to dismiss the case anyway. The second jury reached the same conclusion this past April.
Previously:
• Sarah Palin's kid Track arrested for domestic violence, again
• Sarah Palin loses her libel lawsuit against the New York Times
• Sarah Palin, would-be banner of books
