Jonathan Stempel

NEW YORK, (Reuters) – A federal judge on Tuesday vigorously defended his handling the defamation case against Sarah Palin, former Alaska governor. He also decided to dismiss Palin’s case as jurors still deliberated.

U.S. District Court Judge Jed Rakoff of Manhattan declared in the first paragraph of his 68-page ruling that Sarah Palin had “wholly failed” to prove her case to the law.

Rakoff’s decision was made two weeks after the Times editorial page editor James Bennet and the Times were found not guilty by a jury of Palin, 2008 Republican U.S. Vice Presidential candidate.

Palin (58) had filed a lawsuit over an editorial in June 2017 about gun control which incorrectly connected her with a mass shooting in 2011.

After approximately 1 and 1/2 days without reaching a decision, Rakoff announced to lawyers present that he was going to dismiss Palin’s case. He said that Palin hadn’t provided clear and convincing evidence that Palin had committed “actual malice” by the Times.

The timing of the trial proved difficult because jurors got push notifications from their cell phones regarding Rakoff’s plan.

Later, some of the participants told the clerk that it did not have any effect on their discussions. These continued for a few more hours.

“The court doesn’t know why jurors for this case, highly committed citizens with high moral standards, would not be firm enough to resist this information,” said the judge. He has over 300 jury trials.

Rakoff stated that “no one objected in any way” to jurors continuing to deliberate after Palin’s ruling. He also noted that he warned jurors not to “turn aside” when they learn what he had done.

“The fundamental point,” he said, was that the legality of any push notification effect may be irrelevant.

Kenneth Turkel (a Palin lawyer) declined to comment.

Danielle Rhoades Ha, Times spokesperson, said via email: “We are confident that judge and jury have decided this case correctly and fairly.”

Analysts consider Palin’s situation a test case of New York Times v. Sullivan (a 1964 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that established an “actual malice” standard to show defamation.

For public officials to be successful, they must prove that media outlets published incorrect information or that they were ignorant of the truth.

Palin’s attorneys confirmed Monday that they will seek to overturn the verdict and get a fresh trial. They also intend to disqualify Rakoff.

They must submit their legal arguments by March 15, and the Times is scheduled to reply by February 29.

On June 14, 2017, the Times editorial lamented gun control and lamented incendiary politics.

This happened after a shooting at Virginia congressional baseball practice. Steve Scalise, Republican U.S. Representative was also among those who were injured.

Bennet had drafted an editorial with one of his colleagues that addressed the shootings in Arizona, January 2011, that left six dead and injured Democratic U.S. Congresswoman Gabby Giffords.

Bennet incorrectly stated that “the connection to political incitement” was evident between the Arizona shooting, and Palin’s map putting Giffords (and 19 other Democrats) under fire.

The Times corrected it the next day.

Palin, who was Senator John McCain’s running-mate during the 2008 election for the presidency and served as Alaska’s governor between 2006 and 2009.