Get all your news in one place.
100's of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
St. Louis Post-Dispatch
St. Louis Post-Dispatch
St. Louis Post-Dispatch Editorial Board

Editorial: It's difficult for public figures to prove libel. That shouldn't change

A jury on Tuesday rejected Sarah Palin’s libel claim in a lawsuit against The New York Times, but that’s unlikely to be the end of it. The former vice presidential nominee is almost certain to appeal, with an eye toward making this a test case before the U.S. Supreme Court. It could become the conservative court’s latest temptation to overturn important precedent that should be left alone.

Currently, public figures like Palin must show not merely that a statement was false and defamatory in order to prove libel, but also that it was made maliciously and with reckless disregard for the truth. The idea is that, when it comes to commentary regarding those at the center of society’s big cultural or political issues, the standard for libel must be higher than mere honest mistakes. Otherwise, it would have a chilling effect on open debate.

Palin is suing over a June 2017 New York Times editorial that falsely alleged that the gunman who killed six people and critically wounded then-U.S. Rep. Gabby Giffords in Arizona in 2011 was incited by an ad from Palin’s political action committee that showed crosshair targets on Democratic districts. In fact, there’s been no evidence that the political ad had anything to do with the gunman’s actions.

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100's of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.