NEW YORK, Feb 3 (Reuters) – Former Alaskan governor and 2008 Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Pauline appeared in the New York Times on Thursday in connection with a highly anticipated defamation lawsuit that could test America’s long-term security. The media.

Pauline, 57, sued the editorial in 2017, which killed six people in a 2011 Arizona mass shooting and seriously injured U.S. Rep.

In his initial statement, Pauline’s lawyer Shane Vogt told the jury that his client was “fighting upwards.” The editorial reflects the knowledge of the Times and its “pro-history” on him and other Republicans.

The Times’ lawyer, David Axelrod, in his inaugural statement objected that the editorial sought to hold both Democrats and Republicans accountable for the annoying rhetoric, and said the newspaper had acted “as soon as possible” to correct its mistake.

The trial in federal court in Manhattan began in 1964 with the New York Times v. That could turn out to be a test of the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark ruling of Sullivan, which makes it difficult for public figures like Pauline to prove libel.

To win, Pauline must deliver Clear and conclusive evidence The Times acted with “real evil,” knowing that the editorial was false or irresponsible disregard for the truth. She is seeking unspecified compensation for allegedly damaging her reputation.

Two conservative U.S. Supreme Court justices and some legal scholars have suggested Sullivan reconsider the decision, and signaled that he would challenge it on appeal if Paul’s defeat.

“What am I trying to achieve? Justice for people who expect the truth in the media,” Paul told reporters as he entered the courtroom.

On June 14, 2017, the controversial editorial “Death Politics in the United States” was published in the aftermath of a shooting in Alexandria, Virginia, in which Republican House of Representatives member Steve Scholes was injured.

The editorial questioned whether the shooting reflected how deadly American politics had become.

Following Pauline’s political action group’s spread of a map that puts Keyford and 19 Democrats under the “Stylish Cross Horse”, it said the link to “political motivation” was clear when Jared Lee Laughner opened fire on the 2011 shooting.

Former editorial editor James Bennett, who is also a defendant, added controversial words to a draft prepared by Elizabeth Williamson, a colleague on the Times editorial board.

Timothy Zigg, a professor and first editing expert at William & Mary Law School, said, “The key is to show how the editorial came together. Essentially, did the Times do its homework before it was published?”

Govt delay

Pauline’s lawyer Vogt said, “We’re not trying to get your vote here for Governor Pauline or his policies,” but instead said the Times should be held accountable for the “particularly horrific and deleted” editorial.

He described Bennett as a “highly educated professional journalist” who, despite knowing that the words he added were incorrect, did not change them.

“He had his story, he stuck to it,” Vogt said.

But Axelrod said he did not want Bennett to testify that Laughner acted because of Paul, or that readers were guessing a link, and that Bennett would testify “exactly what he said.”

Axelrod also told the Times that no one had a bad preference for Paul and that the controversy was about just two sentences in a 12-paragraph editorial.

“The editorial is not even about her,” he said.

Williamson, who still works for the Times, was the first witness to the trial.

He asserted that his confession had been obtained through torture, and that his confession had been obtained through torture.

Williamson was asked to discuss an email Bennett sent before the editorial, where he was asked if there was a role for the hate speech, and suggested that it may have been before the Giffords shooting.

The trial was adjourned until January 24 as it was confirmed that Pauline had a corona infection.

Pauline has publicly stated that she will not receive the COVID-19 vaccine. He was wearing a black mask in the courtroom.

The Times has suffered no casualties in the defamation case for more than half a century.

Supreme Court Judge Clarence Thomas has said Sullivan should be reconsidered Little historical evidence Suggested that the truly harmful standard flowed from the original meaning of the First and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

Another judge, Neil Korsch, said he would provide the standard “Iron cap subsidy for publishing lies” The number of media outlets spreading sensational information without considering the truth is increasing.

Report by Jonathan Stemble and Jodi Godoy in New York; Additional report by Luke Cohen, Andrew Hofstetter and Hussein Gate; Editing by Grand McCauley, Jonathan Odyssey and Will Dunham

Our standards: Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.