SCOTUS refuses – The Supreme Court refused to revive Alan Dershowitz’s $300 million defamation lawsuit against CNN over how the network portrayed his remarks during Donald Trump’s 2020 impeachment defense. Justices Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas dissented, arguing the Court
For Alan Dershowitz, the fight didn’t end with an appeals process—it ended with a single Supreme Court refusal.
On Monday, the Supreme Court declined to take up his $300 million defamation lawsuit against CNN, and it did so in a brief, unexplained order that left the lower courts’ dismissal in place. Justices Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas dissented.
Dershowitz. a retired Harvard Law School professor and legal commentator. said CNN aired only a portion of a comment he made during his defense of President Donald Trump during the 2020 impeachment. In court documents, he argued the edit distorted his meaning and made him appear to have “lost his mind.”.
CNN, for its part, said multiple outlets had interpreted the remarks in a similar way, and that Dershowitz could not show the network was trying to mischaracterize what he said.
The justices were asked to wade into a larger constitutional fight: Dershowitz urged the Supreme Court to reconsider New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. the landmark First Amendment decision that requires public figures to prove that a defendant knowingly published falsehoods or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. Lower courts had dismissed the suit after concluding that Dershowitz hadn’t met the “actual malice” standard that New York Times Co. v. Sullivan requires.
The impeachment context matters because the dispute sits inside a high-stakes political moment. Dershowitz was part of Trump’s defense team during the impeachment trial over allegations that Trump sought political favors from Ukraine in return for U.S. military aid. The Senate ultimately acquitted Trump.
During the trial, Dershowitz responded to a question by saying: “the only thing that would make a quid pro quo unlawful is if the quo were somehow illegal.” He added that providing arms to Ukraine isn’t illegal.
But in his complaint. Dershowitz alleged CNN only played what he said moments later: “Every public official that I know believes that his election is in the public interest and. mostly. they are right. your election is in the public interest. and if the president does something which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest. that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment.”.
Dershowitz said the cut made it seem like he was arguing that a president could avoid impeachment for illegal acts if he was doing it to get reelected—an idea he described in his original suit as “preposterous and foolish on its face.”
CNN denied any distortion. It said it aired Dershowitz’s full remarks during its live coverage and invited him on twice more to expand on his meaning.
The Supreme Court’s refusal means the legal dispute stays where lower courts left it: with the hurdle of “actual malice” and the difficulty public figures face in winning defamation claims tied to speech about public affairs.
Justices Gorsuch and Thomas dissented from Monday’s decision. writing in a way that signals they believe the Court should revisit the legal standards applied to defamation claims by public figures. In the meantime. Dershowitz’s attempt to revive a suit that seeks $300 million remains blocked—another reminder of how quickly the Supreme Court can close a case without explanation. even when a plaintiff says the record was altered in a way that changes how words are understood.
MISRYOUM politics news Supreme Court SCOTUS Alan Dershowitz CNN defamation lawsuit $300 million Neil Gorsuch Clarence Thomas New York Times Co. v. Sullivan actual malice Donald Trump impeachment