On appeal, Sandmann is likely to win. I’ll lay out why, after a quick review of what happened."
So writes Margot Cleveland at the Federalist. She makes an interesting case, but first a dissent.
Professor Jacobson over at Legal Insurrection thinks Sandmann's appeal is still-born, and can't see a path past the court's conclusion of "Alleged defamatory statements were non-actionable opinions."
The courts are ostensibly apolitical, but we all see through that canard - particularly amid the current pandemic of TDS rampaging through the society.
That said, I must side with the doubts of Professor Jacobson; in a perfect world, etc., but... and it's big but.
So, I leave you Margot Cleavland's summation:
"If Sandmann loses his appeal, the consequences will be direr than his personal defeat. As his father, Ted Sandmann said following Friday’s ruling, “I believe fighting for justice for my son and family is of vital national importance. If what was done to Nicholas is not legally actionable, then no one is safe.”
The senior Sandmann is correct. A defeat would sound the death knell to the last remaining check on a profession that has abandoned all pretense of serious, unbiased, and fact-based reporting since Donald Trump entered the political arena—defamation law."
