Sarah Palin Secures Rare Retrial in Defamation Case Against The New York Times

By Devin Breitenberg

In a surprising turn of legal events, former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin has been granted a retrial in her long-standing defamation lawsuit against The New York Times, reigniting a case that has already seen two losses for Palin in 2022. This development, reported on April 15, 2025, marks a significant moment in the ongoing debate over press freedom, public figures, and the legal threshold for defamation in the United States.

Background of the Case

The lawsuit stems from a 2017 editorial published by The New York Times titled "America's Lethal Politics," which linked Palin to the 2011 mass shooting in Tucson, Arizona, that killed six people and injured then-Representative Gabrielle Giffords. The editorial referenced a political action committee associated with Palin that had circulated a map with crosshairs over certain congressional districts, including Giffords’. The piece suggested a connection between this imagery and the shooting, a claim that was later corrected by the newspaper after backlash.

Palin sued, alleging that the editorial falsely implicated her in inciting the violence and damaged her reputation. Under U.S. defamation law, public figures like Palin must prove "actual malice"—meaning the publisher knew the statement was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth—a high bar set by the landmark 1964 case New York Times v. Sullivan.

A Rocky Legal Journey

Palin’s case has been a rollercoaster. In 2022, a jury ruled against her, finding that The New York Times did not act with actual malice. Simultaneously, the trial judge, U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff, dismissed the case mid-trial, citing insufficient evidence—a rare move that sparked debate over judicial overreach. Palin appealed, and the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals vacated Rakoff’s dismissal, criticizing his decision to rule while the jury was still deliberating. The appeals court ordered a new trial, citing procedural errors, including the judge’s exclusion of certain evidence and his handling of juror bias.

Despite this, Palin lost again in a second trial later in 2022. Undeterred, she pressed forward with another appeal, arguing that the trial process remained flawed. Her persistence paid off when, in a decision reported on April 15, 2025, a federal appeals court granted her a third chance at trial, an extraordinarily rare outcome in defamation cases.

What’s at Stake in the Retrial?

This retrial is more than a personal battle for Palin; it has broader implications for media law and the protections afforded to journalists under the First Amendment. Palin’s legal team has openly challenged the Sullivan standard, arguing that it gives too much leeway to media outlets to publish falsehoods about public figures without consequence. They contend that The New York Times acted recklessly by not thoroughly fact-checking the editorial, especially given the sensitivity of the topic.

The New York Times, for its part, has defended the editorial as an honest mistake, quickly corrected, and not indicative of malice. The newspaper argues that overturning or weakening the Sullivan precedent would chill free speech, making journalists hesitant to report on controversial issues involving public figures for fear of costly lawsuits.

Legal experts are divided. Some see Palin’s case as a potential vehicle for the U.S. Supreme Court to revisit Sullivan, especially given recent criticisms of the standard by conservative justices like Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch. Others warn that lowering the bar for defamation claims could lead to a flood of litigation, undermining investigative journalism at a time when public trust in media is already fragile.

Public and Political Reactions

The decision to grant a retrial has sparked varied reactions. Palin, a polarizing figure since her 2008 vice-presidential run alongside John McCain, has framed the case as a fight for accountability. In a statement following the ruling, she said, “This isn’t just about me—it’s about ensuring the media can’t smear people with lies and get away with it.” Her supporters, particularly in conservative circles, have rallied behind her, viewing the case as a stand against what they see as liberal media bias.

Critics, however, argue that Palin’s lawsuit is an attempt to weaponize defamation law against the press. Media advocacy groups like the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press have expressed concern, noting that the Sullivan standard has been a cornerstone of press freedom for over half a century. “If public figures can sue over editorial errors without clear evidence of malice, it sets a dangerous precedent,” said a spokesperson for the group.

What’s Next?

The retrial is expected to take place later in 2025, though no specific date has been set. Palin’s legal team will likely focus on the internal communications of The New York Times editorial board, aiming to prove that the newspaper acted with reckless disregard for the truth. The Times, meanwhile, will double down on its argument that the error was a good-faith mistake, not a malicious attack.

This case also arrives at a politically charged moment. With the 2024 U.S. presidential election still fresh in the public’s mind and ongoing debates over media credibility, the outcome could influence how newsrooms approach reporting on public figures in the future. If Palin wins, it might embolden other high-profile individuals to pursue similar lawsuits, potentially reshaping the legal landscape for journalism.

A Test of Balance

Sarah Palin’s defamation case against The New York Times is a rare test of the delicate balance between protecting free speech and holding media accountable for harmful falsehoods. As the retrial looms, all eyes will be on the courtroom—and the potential ripple effects for the First Amendment. Whether this case marks a turning point in defamation law or reaffirms long-standing precedent, its outcome will undoubtedly leave a lasting mark on the intersection of media, law, and politics.

Devin Breitenberg is a legal consultant and senior counsel at Devin Law LLC and legal contributor  for Veritas Expositae.  You can reach her at devin.breitenberg@veritasexpositae.com