Former Alaska governor and 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee, Sarah Palin, will have another opportunity to pursue her defamation lawsuit against The New York Times. On Wednesday, a federal appeals court unanimously ruled in favor of Palin, overturning a 2022 jury verdict that favored the newspaper. The three-judge panel from the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals determined that the trial judge had made several errors in the case.

In 2017, The New York Times published an editorial suggesting that Palin had encouraged a mass shooting. Specifically, the editorial linked her campaign materials to the 2011 shooting of then-Rep. Gabby Giffords in Arizona, despite no established connection. Although the Times corrected the editorial, Palin filed a lawsuit, alleging that the paper and its then-editorial page editor, James Bennet, intentionally lied about her due to a political vendetta.

During the subsequent trial, evidence was presented on the crucial legal issue of "actual malice," which Palin needed to prove in order to succeed in her case. However, U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff ruled after the close of evidence that Palin had failed to meet this burden. The appeals court panel disagreed, stating that Palin had indeed presented sufficient evidence for a jury to find in her favor on the issue of actual malice.

Furthermore, the appellate court found that the trial process was tainted by the fact that some jurors received news alerts from The New York Times about Rakoff's ruling while they were deliberating. The panel concluded that this could have biased the jury's final verdict. Despite the jurors' assurance that their decision was unaffected by the news alerts, the appeals court believed that a jury's verdict reached while aware of the judge's ruling would rarely be untainted.

In addition to these errors, the appeals court also criticized Rakoff for preventing Palin from making certain arguments to the jury. This included her claim that Bennet intentionally smeared her to support his brother, Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.). The 2nd Circuit judges asserted that Rakoff's restrictions were improper.

The decision by the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals means that Palin's lawsuit will be given another chance, potentially leading to a retrial. The New York Times has the option to request a rehearing of the appeal before the full bench of the court or even to escalate the case to the Supreme Court.

In response to the ruling, Times spokesperson Charlie Stadtlander expressed disappointment but expressed confidence in prevailing in a retrial. On the other hand, Palin's lawyer, Kenneth Turkel, hailed the decision as a significant step forward in holding publishers accountable for misleading content. Turkel stated that Palin is looking forward to presenting her case to a jury once again.

The outcome of this case has broader implications for the media industry and the responsibility of publishers to ensure accurate and truthful reporting. As the legal battle continues, the spotlight remains on Palin's pursuit of justice and the pursuit of a "level playing field" when it comes to reporting the truth.