Kash Patel’s Defamation Lawsuit Faces Steep Legal Hurdles

Kash Patel’s Defamation Suit Faces High Bar

Former federal prosecutor Kash Patel is facing a difficult challenge in his defamation lawsuit against The Atlantic. Patel is suing the magazine over a report that he claims is false.

However, legal experts point out that as a public figure, Patel must meet a very high standard to win his case. This standard, established by the Supreme Court, requires proving that the publisher acted with “actual malice.” This means showing the information was published knowing it was false or with reckless disregard for the truth.

Public Figure Status and ‘Actual Malice’

The legal concept of “actual malice” is central to defamation cases involving public figures. The Supreme Court case New York Times Company v. Sullivan set this precedent in 1964.

It protects the press’s ability to report on public officials and figures freely. To win a defamation suit, a public figure like Patel must prove the publisher knew the statements were untrue or acted with extreme carelessness about their truthfulness. This high bar is meant to prevent public figures from using lawsuits to silence criticism.

Conservative Media’s Shifting Views on Patel

Within the conservative media sphere, Kash Patel’s standing has become complicated. Before recent events, he was seen by many as a potential ally for Donald Trump and the Department of Justice.

High hopes existed that he would uncover and release important information. However, many feel he has not been honest about the availability of Epstein files, leading to a sense of betrayal among some.

This frustration has significantly impacted his reputation. Some believe he participated in a cover-up and was not forthcoming about crucial information.

This sentiment has made it difficult for him to regain his previous position within the broader right-wing media landscape. His association with the Epstein situation, in particular, has drawn significant animosity.

Patel’s Actions and Public Perception

Patel’s public statements, including a video with Dan Bongino, have also drawn criticism. In that video, he asserted that Jeffrey Epstein died by suicide and that there was no suspicious activity.

This stance contradicted the narrative held by many who believe he was not honest about the extent of available evidence. For those who felt betrayed, Patel’s actions further alienated him and made it hard for him to regain trust.

Despite these issues, Patel is still seen by some as a useful figure. He is believed to be carrying out objectives important to Donald Trump and the DOJ.

There is still hope that he might push for accountability in areas like election integrity. Some are willing to overlook past reporting about his personal conduct, such as the use of government resources for his girlfriend or private jets.

The Lawsuit and Potential Supreme Court Review

Patel’s lawsuit against The Atlantic is part of a broader trend of litigation by public figures. Some speculate that Patel hopes to eventually bring his case before the Supreme Court.

This could be an opportunity for the court to reconsider the Sullivan standard. Justices like Clarence Thomas have expressed skepticism about the current defamation laws protecting the press.

However, legal experts suggest the discovery process presents a major obstacle for Patel. The discovery phase allows both sides to gather evidence. Publicly available reporting already paints a critical picture of Patel’s actions.

This includes stories about his alleged misuse of FBI resources and an FBI jet. These reports could be damaging if they become part of the legal discovery.

The Role of Discovery and Reporter Credibility

The Atlantic reporter Sarah Fitzpatrick, who is quoted in the article, reportedly has over two dozen sources for her story. If her findings are revealed through discovery, it could be detrimental to Patel’s case.

The Atlantic, an established magazine with over a century of history, is well-equipped to handle such legal challenges. Fitzpatrick herself is an accomplished investigative reporter with experience from 60 Minutes.

The publicly documented controversies surrounding Patel could also play a role. Headlines have emerged regarding his girlfriend being protected by FBI SWAT agents and investigations into his use of an FBI jet.

There are also reports of Trump expressing dissatisfaction with Patel’s behavior. Such public records could influence a jury’s perception of Patel as a plaintiff.

What’s Next for Patel’s Lawsuit

Given the high legal bar for defamation and the potential impact of the discovery process, Kash Patel’s lawsuit faces significant challenges. Legal observers believe the case is unlikely to succeed, especially if it were to reach the Supreme Court. The focus now shifts to the evidence that will be revealed through the discovery process and how it might affect the legal proceedings.

Source: Michael Steele: 'Hella high' bar for Kash Patel to prove defamation against The Atlantic (YouTube)