Trump’s Defamation Lawsuit Faces Legal Hurdles

Alan Delsitz, a Harvard professor emeritus, shared insights on Newsmax regarding President Donald Trump’s defamation lawsuit against major media outlets, stating that it is unlikely to succeed based on current U.S. legal standards.

Trump recently filed a $15 billion lawsuit against the New York Times, asserting they spread “false” information to damage his 2024 campaign and reputation. In an appearance on “Records with Greta Van Susterlen,” Delsitz noted that for Trump to win, he must provide evidence of “actual malice,” going beyond just proving false statements.

“In the United States, the burden is on him to show that what was published constitutes a factual misrepresentation, not merely an opinion,” he explained. “He needs to demonstrate that the claims were made with a reckless disregard for the truth.”

Delsitz expressed some concern over the current standards for proving malice but indicated that any significant changes would require the Supreme Court to revisit its own doctrines. He implied that, without such changes, the legal battle could be arduous for Trump. Interestingly, he mentioned there’s a possibility Trump could fare better in the UK legal system.

Trump’s lawsuit references multiple articles from the Times, criticizing them for allegedly misrepresenting facts and damaging his reputation. The Times has dismissed the lawsuit as baseless, emphasizing their commitment to journalism and not being intimidated by legal threats.

In a separate note, CBS and Paramount settled with Trump for $36 million regarding a “60 Minutes” segment, which was reportedly edited. Additionally, ABC News reached a $15 million settlement after Trump filed a lawsuit over a statement made by George Stephanopoulos that he argued misrepresented verdicts against him.

Earlier this week, the Times acknowledged a misattributed anti-Semitic quote related to Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk, issuing a correction.