- within Litigation and Mediation & Arbitration topic(s)
- with Inhouse Counsel
- in United Kingdom
- with readers working within the Healthcare and Retail & Leisure industries
Last week, a federal appeals court affirmed a district court's dismissal of President Trump's defamation suit against CNN. The Eleventh Circuit held that CNN's use of the phrase the "Big Lie," to describe President Trump's attacks on the 2020 election, was not defamatory because it did not constitute a false statement of fact and was constitutionally protected opinion.
In October 2022, President Trump sued CNN over the network's coverage of the 2020 election. President Trump claimed that the news organization defamed him by using the term the "Big Lie" to describe the President's claims about the 2020 election. The district court dismissed President Trump's suit. The district court held that the statements Trump complained of were not defamatory because they constituted protected opinion. The court explained that the President's "stacking of inferences"—that the phrase linked the President to Hitler and was attributed to Joseph Goebbels—"cannot support a finding of falsehood."
On appeal, President Trump argued that the district court got it wrong. The President claimed that the challenged statement was was not opinion. President Trump further argued that by using the phrase the "Big Lie," CNN implied that Trump's "actions and statements were designed to be, and actually were, variations of those [that] Hitler used to suppress and destroy populations."
The Eleventh Circuit disagreed and affirmed the lower court's decision. The Court held that "CNN's subjective assessment of Trump's conduct is not readily capable of being proven true or false." The Court emphasized that both President Trump and CNN had different interpretations of how the President handled his "concerns" over the 2020 election—and that both were "subjective interpretations." Because the President failed to allege falsity, the Court held he failed to state a claim for defamation. The three-judge panel included two justices appointed by President Trump.
This alert provides general coverage of its subject area. We provide it with the understanding that Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz is not engaged herein in rendering legal advice, and shall not be liable for any damages resulting from any error, inaccuracy, or omission. Our attorneys practice law only in jurisdictions in which they are properly authorized to do so. We do not seek to represent clients in other jurisdictions.
