Anonymous
07/26/2019 17:52
Subject: Re:Suit by Covington Catholic student against Washington Post dismissed
Not surprising at all, this case was a no-brainer.
Anonymous
07/26/2019 17:51
Subject: Suit by Covington Catholic student against Washington Post dismissed
Anonymous wrote:there goes the college savings plan...
But the beginning of the grievance tour on wingnut media.
Anonymous
07/26/2019 17:34
Subject: Suit by Covington Catholic student against Washington Post dismissed
there goes the college savings plan...
Anonymous
07/26/2019 17:32
Subject: Suit by Covington Catholic student against Washington Post dismissed
Just refile under "threat of personhood". Or other.
Anonymous
07/26/2019 17:22
Subject: Suit by Covington Catholic student against Washington Post dismissed
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Good.
+1
Correct ruling. And reassuring.
Especially from Kentucky district.
Appointed by Jimmy Carter.
Any reasonably competent judge would've made the same ruling. It was a stupid lawsuit.
Anonymous
07/26/2019 17:17
Subject: Suit by Covington Catholic student against Washington Post dismissed
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Good.
+1
Correct ruling. And reassuring.
Especially from Kentucky district.
Appointed by Jimmy Carter.
Anonymous
07/26/2019 17:09
Subject: Suit by Covington Catholic student against Washington Post dismissed
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Good.
+1
Correct ruling. And reassuring.
Especially from Kentucky district.
Anonymous
07/26/2019 17:08
Subject: Suit by Covington Catholic student against Washington Post dismissed
Trumpsters will take pains to ignore this thread now.
Anonymous
07/26/2019 17:08
Subject: Suit by Covington Catholic student against Washington Post dismissed
Anonymous wrote:Good.
+1
Correct ruling. And reassuring.
Anonymous
07/26/2019 17:08
Subject: Suit by Covington Catholic student against Washington Post dismissed
I am happy to see that the first amendment hasn’t totally been eviscerated.
Anonymous
07/26/2019 17:07
Subject: Suit by Covington Catholic student against Washington Post dismissed
Where are all the people who were saying WaPo would
pay this family millions?
pay this family millions?
Anonymous
07/26/2019 17:01
Subject: Suit by Covington Catholic student against Washington Post dismissed
Shocker.
Anonymous
07/26/2019 16:59
Subject: Suit by Covington Catholic student against Washington Post dismissed
Philips felt “he was being blocked.”
When you watch the video, you can clearly see the guy went straight up to the kid for a confrontation. Anyone with a brain can see this.
When you watch the video, you can clearly see the guy went straight up to the kid for a confrontation. Anyone with a brain can see this.
Anonymous
07/26/2019 16:57
Subject: Suit by Covington Catholic student against Washington Post dismissed
Good.
Anonymous
07/26/2019 16:48
Subject: Suit by Covington Catholic student against Washington Post dismissed
https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2019/07/26/nick-sandmann-lawsuit-against-washington-post-dismissed-federal-judge-trump/1841278001/
William Bertelsman, who heard oral arguments in the case earlier this month, issued the ruling on Friday.
Nick and his attorneys, Todd McMurtry and L. Lin Wood, alleged that the gist of The Washington Post's first article conveyed that Nick had assaulted or physically intimidated Nathan Phillips, engaged in racist conduct, and engaged in taunts.
But, Bertelsman wrote, "this is not supported by the plain language in the article, which states none of these things."
Bertelsman accepted Nick's assertion that he was only standing motionless across from Phillips, without ill intent.
But the Eastern District of Kentucky judge ruled that Phillips, who told the media he felt threatened, had a First Amendment right to express his opinion.
"He concluded that he was being blocked and not allowed to retreat," Bertelsman wrote. "He passed these conclusions on to The Post. They may have been erroneous, but, as discussed above, they are opinion protected by the First Amendment."
William Bertelsman, who heard oral arguments in the case earlier this month, issued the ruling on Friday.
Nick and his attorneys, Todd McMurtry and L. Lin Wood, alleged that the gist of The Washington Post's first article conveyed that Nick had assaulted or physically intimidated Nathan Phillips, engaged in racist conduct, and engaged in taunts.
But, Bertelsman wrote, "this is not supported by the plain language in the article, which states none of these things."
Bertelsman accepted Nick's assertion that he was only standing motionless across from Phillips, without ill intent.
But the Eastern District of Kentucky judge ruled that Phillips, who told the media he felt threatened, had a First Amendment right to express his opinion.
"He concluded that he was being blocked and not allowed to retreat," Bertelsman wrote. "He passed these conclusions on to The Post. They may have been erroneous, but, as discussed above, they are opinion protected by the First Amendment."