FBI Director Nominee Kash Patel Loses Libel Appeal Against CNN
An excerpt from today’s Virginia Court of Appeals decision in Patel v. CNN, Inc., decided by Judge Rosemarie Annunziata, joined by Judge Vernida Chaney (the opinions weigh in at over 12,000 words, so I only excerpt some key passages):
Generally, Patel alleged in an amended complaint that CNN defamed him by reporting that the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (Intelligence Committee) had uncovered evidence that “connected” him to President Trump’s efforts to (1) spread conspiracy theories about then-Vice President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. and (2) coerce Ukraine into announcing an investigation into Vice President Biden and his son, Hunter Biden….
It is undisputed that Patel is a public official and the challenged statements involve a media company’s reporting on a widely publicized political issue. Thus, for Patel’s claims to survive demurrer, he was obliged to allege facts with “sufficient definiteness to enable” the conclusion that CNN published the challenged statements with actual malice [i.e., knowledge that the statements were false or likely false -EV]. Yet his amended complaint was comprised of unspecified conclusions, contradicted by the attached documents, and did not otherwise allege specific instances of conduct “sufficient … to enable [a] court to find the existence of a legal basis for its judgment.” …
Patel argues that the “aggregate” of his allegations demonstrated that CNN published the challenged statements “with knowledge that they were false or with reckless disregard for whether they were false.” He alleged that CNN “harbored extreme professional and personal animus, bias, spite and ill will” toward him, and published the statements to “sensationalize the ‘news,'” “profit from … its false statements,” and “insult” him.
He maintains that CNN’s “agents” were “present during the House impeachment inquiry” and had read the Ukraine Report, so CNN “knew” that no “evidence” was actually “‘uncovered’ connecting [him] to” conspiracy theories or “any ‘diplomatic back channel led by … Giuliani.'” Consequently, he alleged, CNN “manufactured” the challenged statements “out of whole cloth.” In doing so, CNN “abandoned all journalistic integrity,” “violated its own code of ethics,” and “ignored its own prior reporting and reliable information that contradicted” the challenged statements. Indeed, Patel alleged that CNN “purposefully avoided … the truth” by publishing the challenged statements despite knowing that he had denied the allegations….
[U]nder the actual malice standard, a public official must plead with sufficient definiteness, even for media companies that harbor ill will and ordinary malice, that specific persons within those companies who were responsible for the challenged statements knew the statements were false or had “a high degree of subjective awareness of their probable falsity.” Yet Patel’s allegations do not enable such a conclusion because they do not sufficiently “bring home” the actual malice standard to a person or persons at CNN responsible for publishing the challenged statements.
Patel’s amended complaint targets CNN generally, alleging, among other things, that CNN was biased and harbored ill will against him, CNN fabricated the challenged statements, CNN ignored its own reporting and reliable information contradicting the challenged statements, CNN abandoned journalistic integrity and violated its own code of ethics, CNN deliberately and recklessly conveyed a false message to sensationalize the news, CNN republished the statements after being informed that Patel contested them, and CNN purposefully avoided the truth.
But CNN is a medi
Article from Reason.com
The Reason Magazine website is a go-to destination for libertarians seeking cogent analysis, investigative reporting, and thought-provoking commentary. Championing the principles of individual freedom, limited government, and free markets, the site offers a diverse range of articles, videos, and podcasts that challenge conventional wisdom and advocate for libertarian solutions. Whether you’re interested in politics, culture, or technology, Reason provides a unique lens that prioritizes liberty and rational discourse. It’s an essential resource for those who value critical thinking and nuanced debate in the pursuit of a freer society.
