Media Matters

Newsweek Wins Defamation Case Brought by The Satanic Temple

A long-running legal battle between The Satanic Temple and Newsweek has finally wrapped up—with the firm’s client, Newsweek, emerging on … Read More

The Death of Actual Malice: Greatly Exaggerated

Casino magnate Steve Wynn took a big swing at overturning a landmark press freedom ruling, but the Supreme Court basically … Read More

Making Marsy’s Law (better)

When Florida voters approved a constitutional amendment known as “Marsy’s Law” – named for Marsy Nicholas, the UC Santa Barbara … Read More

Actual Malice Is Not “Malice”

Even as plaintiffs in defamation cases attack the actual malice standard, they often mistake what “actual malice” really means. A … Read More

Notes on the Jones Verdicts

A few notes for the media from the Alex Jones verdicts: Although Jones forfeited his right to mount a First … Read More

The Coming Embed Tsunami

Once upon a time, it was safe to an embed an image on a website. Those days are gone. Two federal … Read More

6/4 - A federal judge in the Southern District of New York dismissed Brian Morley’s defamation suit against John Oliver and his production company, holding that Oliver’s Medicaid segment on Last Week Tonight was not defamatory as a matter of law, either through specific statements or by implication. The lawsuit arose from a segment criticizing privatized Medicaid systems, in which plaintiff was quoted saying about a patient with cerebral palsy that “People are allowed to be dirty . . . I would allow him to be a little dirty for a couple of days.” Oliver reacted by saying he could not believe a doctor thought “it’s okay if people have shit on them for days.” Morley sued, arguing Oliver falsely implied (1) that Morley had illegally denied care to patients and (2) that Morley believed diapered, disabled patients could sit in feces for days. The court held that Oliver's statements were substantially true, could not be construed as plaintiff alleged, or non-actionable opinion, and dismissed plaintiff's claims.

5/27 - The Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment for the firm's client, Newsweek, in The Satanic Temple’s libel suit arising from an article reporting accusations by a former member against the organization, holding that New York’s anti-SLAPP law applied and that plaintiff failed to satisfy its burden of demonstrating "actual malice." The court also affirmed dismissal of reporter Julia Duin for lack of personal jurisdiction, finding that her work for Newsweek, a New York-based publication, was not enough where she researched and wrote the article outside the state.

4/24 - A New York judge dismissed a $100 million defamation lawsuit filed by Sean Combs against NBCUniversal, Peacock, and the producers of the documentary Diddy: The Making of a Bad Boy. Combs argued that the documentary falsely portrayed him as involved in multiple crimes, including murder and sex trafficking. The judge ruled Combs could not prove “gross negligence” because the documentary presented competing viewpoints, disclosed the biases of interview subjects, and included responses from Combs’s own representatives. The court also concluded that Combs could not show additional reputational harm because of the extensive public allegations and legal controversies already surrounding him before the documentary aired.

4/17 - A federal judge dismissed Donald Trump’s defamation lawsuit against The Wall Street Journal and its owner Rupert Murdoch over a report linking him to a letter associated with Jeffrey Epstein. Trump alleged the publication falsely attributed the letter to him and harmed his reputation. The court ruled he failed to adequately plead “actual malice,” emphasizing that the Journal sought his comment and included his denial. The dismissal was without prejudice, allowing Trump the opportunity to amend and refile his complaint.

4/10 - The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld the dismissal of a defamation lawsuit brought by Caleb McGillvary—the “hatchet-wielding hitchhiker”—against Rolling Stone. McGillvary sued over a 2023 Rolling Stone article about a documentary on his life, claiming it included four defamatory statements about his behavior and past. A federal district court dismissed the case in 2025, finding the statements were either opinion or substantially true. The Second Circuit agreed, and held that McGillvary also failed to demonstrate that Rolling Stone published the statements with actual malice. Previously, the firm defended producers who were sued by McGillvary in California in a case that was dismissed by the district court and affirmed on appeal by the Ninth Circuit.

View All

Media Matters

Cameron Stracher, PLLC

Get the Media Matters newsletter delivered straight to your inbox!