Trump threatens libel suit against The New York Times for new stories of sexual misconduct

The New York Times refused to retract a story about Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s alleged forcible touching of two women.  Trump lawyers threatened to sue. “Your article is reckless, defamatory and constitutes libel per se. It is apparent from, among other things, the timing of the article, that it is nothing more than a politically-motivated effort to defeat Mr. Trump’s candidacy,” wrote the lawyers. (Politico, October 13, 2016)

Jonathan H. Adler, The Washington Post, October 13, 2016 doesn’t think as a public figure Trump has much of a chance to prevail in a lawsuit. He agrees with the New York Times attorney who wrote that a libel claim must prove damage to reputation, but Trump’s own descriptions of his sexual conduct are consistent with the claims of the women in the Times article.

James Warren of the Poynter Institute, October 13, 2016, agrees that Trump has no chance of winning a libel suit against the Times. Since truth is a defense in libel, the Times head line went, “2 Women Say They Endured Trump’s Sexual Aggression,” and it is clear the women made those statements. Trump’s lawyers would also have to show the Times printed the stories with actual malice or reckless disregard for the truth or falsity of the alleged false statements.

Al Tompkins and Kelly McBride, Poynter Institute, October 13, 2016, list a number of questions news outlets should consider when deciding whether to run stories of sexual misconduct. Tompkins  concludes that the outlets should have passed on the recent spate of she-said, he-denies stories. Given the seriousness of the claims and the context of the election, he argues that the stories offer no new insight or allow Trump a chance to disprove the charges. McBride writes it is essential for reporters to verify the circumstances of the contact and cite sources with whom those attacked shared their stories.