Palin’s Press Problem is Our Problem, Too

Introduction

        In Sarah Palin’s defamation case against the New York Times, jurors received push notifications that the judge dismissed the case while in deliberations. Juror sequestration is an age-old issue, but the smartphone era has provided new challenges as jurors’ lives are more intertwined with media.

In light of Palin’s case, we must ask: does trial publicity interfere with fair trials and if so, how can we fix it?

Palin’s Defamation Case

        Sarah Palin brought suit against The New York Times (“the Times”) for a 2017 editorial they published. In an editorial entitled “America’s Lethal Politics,” the Times had incorrectly implied that a shooting spree had been inspired by an ad circulated by Palin’s political-action committee. The suit charged the Times and its former editorial board editor, James Bennet, with knowingly publishing false information about her. 

        On Friday, the jurors began deliberations. Three days later, U.S. District Judge Rakoff stated in open court that he would dismiss the case regardless of the jury’s decision. Judge Rakoff ruled that Palin failed to prove that the Times acted with “actual malice,” which is an essential element to her case. Palin couldn’t show that the Times had knowingly published a false statement or acted with a reckless disregard for the truth, according to Judge Rakoff. However, the Judge did not share this ruling with the jury. He planned to let deliberations conclude because a verdict could benefit a potential appeals court. Neither side objected to Judge Rakoff’s plan. The Judge cautioned the jurors that they should avoid news coverage of the trial. 

        Nevertheless, that afternoon, jurors involuntarily received push notifications on their phones (ironically, from the Times) that Judge Rakoff had decided to dismiss the case regardless of the jury’s verdict. On Tuesday, after another four hours of deliberations, the jury unanimously ruled against Palin. 

Unfair Trials are a Result of a Free Press

        Palin’s trial could lend ammunition to the argument that the United States neglects its commitment to fair trials in favor of free press principles. Studies have established that “pretrial publicity can influence evaluations of the defendant’s likability, sympathy for the defendant, perceptions of the defendant as a typical criminal, pretrial judgments of the defendant’s guilt, and final verdicts.” 

        Courts have used several devices to ensure jury partiality, including gag orders and jury seclusion. However, only the most extreme measures would have prevented involuntary push notifications. In high profile cases, therefore, judges should be cautious to present inadmissible information in open court. Additionally, judges could instruct jurors to disable news apps on their phones to avoid tainting the jury pool. Regardless, particularly in high profile cases, judges must stringently guard the jury against media bias.