A lawsuit filed by Donald Trump’s campaign organisation against The New York Times was dismissed today by the New York State Supreme Court. The campaign had sued for defamation in relation to an op-ed article written by Max Frankel.
The article, headlined “The Real Trump-Russia Quid Pro Quo” and published on 28th March 2019 (p. 27), argued that Trump had an implicit and mutually beneficial agreement with Vladimir Putin: “There was no need for detailed electoral collusion between the Trump campaign and Vladimir Putin’s oligarchy because they had an overarching deal: the quid of help in the campaign against Hillary Clinton for the quo of a new pro-Russian foreign policy, starting with relief from the Obama administration’s burdensome economic sanctions.”
Judge James d’Auguste ruled that, as an opinion column, the article was protected under the constitution, and that it did not meet the standard of ‘actual malice’ required in US defamation cases brought by public figures.
The article, headlined “The Real Trump-Russia Quid Pro Quo” and published on 28th March 2019 (p. 27), argued that Trump had an implicit and mutually beneficial agreement with Vladimir Putin: “There was no need for detailed electoral collusion between the Trump campaign and Vladimir Putin’s oligarchy because they had an overarching deal: the quid of help in the campaign against Hillary Clinton for the quo of a new pro-Russian foreign policy, starting with relief from the Obama administration’s burdensome economic sanctions.”
Judge James d’Auguste ruled that, as an opinion column, the article was protected under the constitution, and that it did not meet the standard of ‘actual malice’ required in US defamation cases brought by public figures.
0 comment(s):
Post a Comment