I wonder wwhy she didn't file the defamation ssuit when the allegation was first made. And if her waiting until 2 years ago to file hurts her case.
Or possibly the reverse, that she was reluctant to sue, and that she gave them plenty of time to make a retraction, and only sued when the slander was made again, might actually give more weight to her case against the New York Times.
The short version is this.
Public figures can only sue for libel if there is showing to of actual malice or reckless disregard for the truth.
When the allegation first appeared 10 years ago, it was difficult to show actual malice or reckless disregard because there were still questions as to the gunman’s motive.
Eventually we learned that the gun man’s motive was in no way tied to Palin. Even the New York Times acknowledged that.
Despite that, Several years later, in 2017, they repeated the original, disproven, allegation.
This meant that Palin could now sue because they had (allegedly) exhibited reckless disregard of the facts. The reckless disregard, Palin argued, was the Times ignoring their own prior news coverage coverage.
