OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author's opinion.
Project Veritas is going to be allowed to depose The New York Times.
The New York Supreme Court sided with Project Veritas and dismissed The Times’ motion to dismiss a lawsuit against Project Veritas.
The NYT then asked the court to deny Project Veritas from deposing it until its appeal was done, which could take years, The Daily Caller reported.
“Here, having failed to convince the Court that [Project Veritas’] case should be dismissed, [The New York Times] also failed to demonstrate the extraordinary justification required for the imposition of the drastic remedy of a stay pending appeal,” the court decided.
“Fresh off the press: The New York Supreme Court has sided with Project Veritas: Project Veritas will be permitted to depose The New York Times. And for the first time in history, you’ll be right there with us to witness it, Project Veritas said on its Instagram account.
“As you know, we sued the Times for claiming our Minnesota ballot harvesting video was “deceptive.” The New York Times attempted to dismiss the case and we won a historic victory when the New York Supreme Court denied the motion, ruling that the terms “deceptive” and “disinformation” apply to the New York Times’ reporters’ actions and claims. The Times appealed and then asked the Court to issue a stay that would effectively prohibit us from depositing the Times until the appeal is resolved – a process that could last up to three years,” the company said.
“The Court today issued a mic drop of an opinion: “Here, having failed to convince the Court that [Project Veritas’] case should be dismissed, [The New York Times] also failed to demonstrate the extraordinary justification required for the imposition of the drastic remedy of a stay pending appeal.” The Court noted that “despite the fact that [the New York Times has] been permitted to file anti-SLAPP motions to dismiss for decades, the [New York Times] here failed to cite any cases in which an unsuccessful moving was granted a stay pending appeal[.]” it said.
“Ladies and gentlemen: Let the depositions begin. Stay tuned. We’re about to drop the first New York Times deposition any day,” it said.
The lawsuit started after a Project Veritas video it claimed showed ballot harvesting had taken place in Minnesota was labeled as deceptive by The Times.
When Project Veritas filed a lawsuit against The Times for the labeling The Times defended itself by saying that the writer who labeled it “deceptive,” Maggie Astor, gave an “unverifiable expression of opinion.”
But the labeling of it being “deceptive” was printed in The Times’ news section, not opinion, and the Court sided with Project Veritas.
Project Veritas pointed out this “opinion” was printed in the news section of The New York Times and the Court agreed: “if a writer interjects an opinion in a news article (and will seek to claim legal protections as opinion) it stands to reason that the writer should have an obligation to alert the reader … that it is opinion.” The Times did not do so, and the Court found this troubling.
The Court found Project Veritas demonstrated “a substantial basis in law and fact that the Defendants [The New York Times] acted with actual malice, that is, with the knowledge that the statements in the Articles were false or made with reckless disregard of whether they were false or not” and Project Veritas should be permitted to “conduct discovery.”
The decision by the court means that Project Veritas can now bring the writer and editor into court and ask them questions under oath which can be recorded and shared by the company.
