NEW YORK (AP) — On Tuesday, a federal judge announced that a retrial for Sarah Palin’s libel lawsuit against The New York Times is set to begin on April 14, unless the parties involved reach a settlement beforehand. This retrial comes after the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals revived Palin’s case, which had been previously dismissed by Judge Jed S. Rakoff in February 2022 during jury deliberations.
The dispute originates from a 2017 editorial by The Times that wrongfully linked Palin’s political rhetoric to a mass shooting incident. Following the publication, Palin asserted that her reputation and career had been significantly harmed. The Times recognized that its editorial included inaccuracies, clarifying these as an “honest mistake” and stating that there was no intention to damage her reputation.
During a recent telephone conference, Judge Rakoff expressed his intent to facilitate a settlement between the two parties. David L. Axelrod, representing The Times, stated that discussions regarding a potential resolution have resumed, especially given the difficulty in locating witnesses after such a lengthy period. He remarked, “It may be that we don’t need a trial at all.”
Kenneth G. Turkel, Palin’s attorney, echoed Axelrod’s sentiments, emphasizing that mediation had not been attempted thus far. “We want to give it a shot,” he noted, highlighting the desire for constructive dialogue.
Rakoff was supportive of the idea of a settlement, indicating that he could promptly arrange for a magistrate judge to assist in mediation talks. “I’m all for that if you’re seriously interested in settling. You can settle it in a matter of days,” he mentioned, reinforcing the possibility of a quick resolution.
After the previous dismissal of the case, Rakoff allowed the jurors to complete their deliberations, which ultimately resulted in a verdict against Palin. The 2nd Circuit’s appeal decision criticized Rakoff’s earlier handling of the case, suggesting he had made credibility assessments and disregarded plausible evidence that could support Palin’s claims. Moreover, the appellate court raised concerns that Rakoff’s mid-deliberation ruling might have reached jurors through cellphone alerts, potentially undermining the verdict’s integrity.
The outcome of these discussions and the impending retrial will be closely watched, as it holds implications for both Palin and The Times, particularly regarding issues of free speech and accountability in journalism.
