In Sherrod Lawsuit, Andrew Breitbart Argues that Journalists Have the Right to Lie
In their request for dismissal of Shirley Sherrod’s suit, Breitbart and co-defendant argue for the right of journalists to get things completely backwards, to state the opposite, to be 100 percent wrong — in other words they argue that it’s ok for Journalists to lie. A strange defense from strange characters.
In a joint motion for dismissal (PDF) filed yesterday in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Breitbart and co-defendant Larry O’Connor, who works with Breitbart, claim that in lodging accusations of racism against Sherrod based on her comments in the clip, they were engaging in protected speech under the First Amendment.
The two maintain that the clip “captured the gist of the speech” and that they were within their rights to interpret her statements contrary to what Sherrod has said was the larger meaning of her speech.
“But from the truthful facts laid out in the excerpt, Breitbart drew a contrary conclusion about the meaning of what was said, as Americans with different beliefs and formative experiences often do when the topic is the endlessly arguable subject of race relations,” the defendants argued in their motion to dismiss.
Sherrod originally sued Breitbart, O’Connor and a third unnamed defendant in District of Columbia Superior Court in February. The defendants moved the case into U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in early March on the grounds that it belonged in federal court because of diversity jurisdiction and the fact that requested damages were in excess of $75,000, but noted in their motion that they were not admitting Washington was the proper venue for the case.
