Covington Catholic Students File Defamation Suit
[guest post by Dana]
This comes after the dismissal of Nick Sandmann’s lawsuit against The Washington Post:
Eight Covington Catholic High School students claim they were defamed during a field trip to Washington in January in a lawsuit filed in Kentucky.
The lawsuit seeks damages for alleged defamatory comments by 12 individuals—lawmakers, journalists and social media personalities, Law & Crime reported Friday.
The individuals include presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and New York Times White House correspondent Maggie Haberman.
Details:
“Several of our Senators, most-famous celebrities, and widely read journalists, collectively used their large social media platforms, perceived higher credibility and public followings to lie and libel minors they never met, based on an event they never witnessed,” the lawsuit said, according to Law & Crime.
“These defendants called for the kids to be named and shamed, doxxed and expelled, and invited public retaliation against these minors from a small town in Kentucky,” the lawsuit said.
Defendants include: Rep. Deb Haaland (D-New Mexico), CNN’s Ana Navarro, comedian Kathy Griffin, ABC News political analyst Matthew Dowd, writer Reza Aslan, Kentucky entrepreneur Adam Edelen, Princeton University History Professor Kevin M. Kruse, activist and journalist Shaun King, Mother Jones editor-in-chief Clara Jeffery and Rewire.News editor-in-chief Jodi Jacobson.
The reports notes that the eight Covington students are listed in the lawsuit as John Doe plaintiffs.
(Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.)
–Dana
Hello.
Dana (fdf131) — 8/3/2019 @ 11:06 am“activist and journalist Shaun King”
LOL
Munroe (4bb078) — 8/3/2019 @ 11:13 amGood.
NJRob (4d595c) — 8/3/2019 @ 11:24 amTalcum x who provoked a suicide this week with his irresponsible allegations?
Narciso (72d34b) — 8/3/2019 @ 11:24 amThis is good news for anyone who wanted these adult men associated with their behavior. Not so good for the plaintiffs’s stated goals. Excellent for their self-described “attorney to the stars” if the Streisand Effect is actually part of his business model.
We’ll have to see what Kentucky’s Judiciary says to know if it’s good for the First Amendment. Kentucky has no anti-SLAPP law that I’m aware of so who knows?
Dustin (6d7686) — 8/3/2019 @ 11:49 amHopefully they have a better lawyer than Sandmann did. I doubt it, though.
Leviticus (fb75e2) — 8/3/2019 @ 12:05 pmHopefully for their sake, I mean. Hopefully not, for the sake of the First Amendment.
Leviticus (fb75e2) — 8/3/2019 @ 12:06 pmlololololololol
Just saw the statements this lawyer highlighted as “defamatory.”
12(B)(6)
And if Dustin is correct that Kentucky has no anti-SLAPP law, this lawyer is lucky for it. Every state should have an anti-SLAPP law, specifically for dealing with frivolous defamation cases like this one.
Leviticus (fb75e2) — 8/3/2019 @ 12:17 pmHere is another link about the lawsuit. It primarily discusses federal vs state jurisdiction, but also includes some of the alleged defamation.
DRJ (15874d) — 8/3/2019 @ 12:28 pm“This is good news for anyone who wanted these adult men associated with their behavior.“
Dustin (6d7686) — 8/3/2019 @ 11:49 am
The only adults involved are the biological ones who used their infantile brains to smear these kids.
Munroe (4bb078) — 8/3/2019 @ 12:28 pmSpecifically:
Dana (fdf131) — 8/3/2019 @ 12:38 pmThat is going to be hard for the plaintiffs to win. The only one I am not sure about is if one called on someone to punch a kid in the face. If “cavemen gestures” are defamatory, every Florida State fan is in trouble.
DRJ (15874d) — 8/3/2019 @ 12:48 pmhttps://thefederalist.com/2019/07/29/covington-catholic-teen-lost-first-court-battle-will-probably-win-next/
harkin (92ce59) — 8/3/2019 @ 1:10 pmit’s rather striking how some approve of the defamation of these kids, because they wear the wrong colored hat, it’s like they’ve learned nothing in 10 years but point at another,
narciso (d1f714) — 8/3/2019 @ 1:13 pmDefamation is a term of art, narciso. You may think that what happened to these kids was unfair, but that does not make it “defamation.”
Leviticus (fb75e2) — 8/3/2019 @ 1:15 pmKathy Griffith – what a hateful character. Glad she was named. That women is strange and needs to bounced off twitter.
rcocean (1a839e) — 8/3/2019 @ 3:36 pmExactly how does one defame an anonymous person?
The video of the incident shows some of those kids behind Sandmann laughing, taunting,mocking, indulging in rude gestures, etc. So to some degree, the alleged defamation was simply reciting facts.
Kishnevi (83552a) — 8/3/2019 @ 8:05 pmWhen the First Amendment was ratified, sixteen-year old Kentucky boys would have handled a mob of foul-mouthed black thugs and a drum-pounding Indian vagabond by unlimbering their squirrel rifles and their skinning knives. These days, you’re not even allowed to stare them down without being called a “racist punk”. Aaah, for the good old days!
nk (dbc370) — 8/3/2019 @ 9:12 pmNow they just file whiny and frivolous defamation lawsuits as “John Does 1-8.”
You’re at least right that the passage of time and the development of civil rights has made sixteen year old Kentucky boys way less scary.
Leviticus (fb75e2) — 8/3/2019 @ 9:43 pmMy guess (it’s not worth looking up) is that Kentucky libel law is weak on “false light” and “innuendo”, and that’s why Nick Sandman lost. As I understand it, New York Times v. Sullivan never became an issue. (Not that I think that New York Times v. Sullivan is anything more than a black-robed junta just making up law as it goes along with about as much of a resemblance to the First Amendment as 1789 Kentucky has to 2019 DC.)
nk (dbc370) — 8/3/2019 @ 10:10 pmLeviticus (fb75e2) — 8/3/2019 @ 9:43 pm
felipe (023cc9) — 8/3/2019 @ 10:19 pmHeh!