Alan Dershowitz Defamation Lawsuit Against CNN Shot Down By SCOTUS

[skews13]

A brief in opposition urged the justices to see Dershowitz's "real complaint" — that pundits on CNN and elsewhere "misinterpreted" his Ukraine impeachment defense of President Donald Trump in 2020 — was "not an actionable defamation claim," let alone a "vehicle" for overturning the landmark 1964 precedent set by New York Times v. Sullivan.

Pointing out that several other media outlets contemporaneously interpreted his remarks similarly and that the network had Dershowitz on air twice after he "complained about the coverage," CNN's lawyers with Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP and Davis Wright Tremaine LLP said SCOTUS should reject the proposed "drastic curtailment of the press's and public's freedom to discuss the President's arguments for remaining in the highest office in the land."

"[H]e loses under any evidentiary standard because he had no evidence," the brief said, and "his claims masquerade opinions and interpretations as statements of fact."

MSN

MAGA's bad day at the court just keeps getting worse.

 

[Dante]

A brief in opposition urged the justices to see Dershowitz's "real complaint" — that pundits on CNN and elsewhere "misinterpreted" his Ukraine impeachment defense of President Donald Trump in 2020 — was "not an actionable defamation claim," let alone a "vehicle" for overturning the landmark 1964 precedent set by New York Times v. Sullivan.

Pointing out that several other media outlets contemporaneously interpreted his remarks similarly and that the network had Dershowitz on air twice after he "complained about the coverage," CNN's lawyers with Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP and Davis Wright Tremaine LLP said SCOTUS should reject the proposed "drastic curtailment of the press's and public's freedom to discuss the President's arguments for remaining in the highest office in the land."

"[H]e loses under any evidentiary standard because he had no evidence," the brief said, and "his claims masquerade opinions and interpretations as statements of fact."

MSN

MAGA's bad day at the court just keeps getting worse.

Yes. Finally somebody started a thread on this. We've been waiting. Dersh was found to be talking out of both sides of his mouth on his defense of Trump.

thank you.

Dersh left the Democratic party to become a Republican or supposed Independent? He became a MAGA-splainor.

 

[jacksonlamb]

Of course the lawsuit was a dead duck from the beginning.

 

[Dante]

Of course the lawsuit was a dead duck from the beginning.

This and the birthright decision is expected shortly...

 

[MisterBeale]

A brief in opposition urged the justices to see Dershowitz's "real complaint" — that pundits on CNN and elsewhere "misinterpreted" his Ukraine impeachment defense of President Donald Trump in 2020 — was "not an actionable defamation claim," let alone a "vehicle" for overturning the landmark 1964 precedent set by New York Times v. Sullivan.

Pointing out that several other media outlets contemporaneously interpreted his remarks similarly and that the network had Dershowitz on air twice after he "complained about the coverage," CNN's lawyers with Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP and Davis Wright Tremaine LLP said SCOTUS should reject the proposed "drastic curtailment of the press's and public's freedom to discuss the President's arguments for remaining in the highest office in the land."

"[H]e loses under any evidentiary standard because he had no evidence," the brief said, and "his claims masquerade opinions and interpretations as statements of fact."

MSN

MAGA's bad day at the court just keeps getting worse.

This isn't about MAGA, this is about free speech. And after what Biden and his administration did to free speech during the scamdemic, such a comment sorta makes you look like a hypocrite IMO.

No matter who folks vote for, the folks in charge all agree. . . they don't want folks talking to each other.