All the gossipy, vicious Nazi fun goes out of the world when someone sues for defamation.<\/p>\n
This, from John Ross’s Volokh Report’s summaries of federal cases:<\/p>\n
Twitter flips out after woman at rally for then-candidate Donald Trump sieg heils in photo. The actor James Woods tweets the woman’s identity and suggests she is a Bernie Sanders supporter planted to make Trump look bad. But wait! He identifies the wrong woman. Before @RealJamesWoods deletes the tweet and exonerates the misidentified woman 11 days later, she gets hundreds of threatening messages. Defamation? Sixth Circuit<\/a>: Not under Ohio law. “So-called #Trump ‘Nazi’ is a #BernieSanders agitator\/operative?” is more question than defamatory assertion.<\/em><\/p>\n Now, the Sixth Circuit is fairly conservative, if I remember correctly. So I guess if you’re going to call someone a “Bernie Sanders agitator\/operative,” and she isn’t, you’ll be cool if you put a question mark at the end of it. Especially if the misidentified person you cited sues in Ohio.<\/p>\n But still, this is a lesson in why you don’t think you’re getting the facts of life from Twitter.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" All the gossipy, vicious Nazi fun goes out of the world when someone sues for defamation. This, from John Ross’s Volokh Report’s summaries of federal cases: Twitter flips out after woman at rally for then-candidate Donald Trump sieg heils in … Continue reading