Court Rejects Dershowitz’s Defamation Suit Against CNN Over Trump Impeachment Trial Coverage

In a legal setback for retired Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz, the Eleventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed his defamation lawsuit against CNN over its coverage of his defense of President Donald Trump during the 2020 impeachment trial.

The court ruled that Dershowitz failed to present evidence suggesting CNN’s reporters and commentators acted with “actual malice” while covering his arguments in support of Trump’s push for Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden, a major rival in the presidential race.

Judge Britt Grant, writing for the majority, stated that Dershowitz’s claims stemmed from misinterpretations of his statements made during Congressional proceedings, but he provided no proof that these interpretations were intentional.

In response to the ruling, Dershowitz announced his intention to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing that the Eleventh Circuit’s decision relied heavily on New York Times v. Sullivan, a landmark 1964 case he believes has been unfairly extended to shield journalists from accountability.

Judge Barbara Lagoa, in a concurring opinion, acknowledged that CNN had defamed Dershowitz but voted to uphold the lawsuit’s dismissal due to the binding nature of Sullivan. Lagoa emphasized that Dershowitz faces an obstacle to justice solely because of this ruling.

A third judge, Charles Wilson, concurred with Sullivan and its protection of press freedom in a separate opinion. CNN declined to comment on the decision.

During Trump’s first term, Dershowitz was among several high-profile attorneys appointed by the president following his impeachment by the Democrat-led House of Representatives in December 2019 over two charges related to dealings with Ukraine. Trump requested that Ukraine investigate Biden and his son Hunter, who had joined the board of Ukrainian energy company Burisma while his father was U.S. vice president.

During the impeachment trial, Dershowitz offered a broad defense of presidential power that drew criticism from Democrats. He argued that if a president takes actions they believe will benefit them electorally and are in the public interest, such actions should not constitute an impeachable offense.

Following CNN’s coverage of these remarks, Dershowitz filed a lawsuit against the network, citing internal communications as evidence of collusion to harm his reputation. However, Grant’s majority opinion states that these messages support CNN’s position that its speakers genuinely believed in their reporting. The case is Alan Dershowitz v. Cable News Network, Inc., 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, 23-11270.