Alan Dershowitz has turned to the U.S. Supreme Court in a renewed bid to resurrect his defamation lawsuit against CNN, framing the dispute as something larger than a personal grievance — a challenge to the legal shield that has protected American media for six decades.
In a petition filed last week, the retired Harvard law professor urged the court to reconsider the standard set in the landmark 1964 ruling that requires public figures to prove “actual malice” to win libel cases. According to Dershowitz, that rule has hardened into what he describes as an impenetrable barrier, one that leaves public figures without recourse even when reporting is deeply misleading.
He argues the doctrine should apply only to government officials, not to all public figures, and insists that lowering the bar would not endanger responsible journalism. “Good journalism would survive just fine,” he has said, while irresponsible reporting would no longer enjoy near-automatic immunity.
The Supreme Court has repeatedly declined invitations to revisit the standard, including a recent appeal by casino magnate Steve Wynn and earlier challenges that prompted dissent from conservative justices who signaled discomfort with the breadth of the rule. Still, Dershowitz believes his case stands out. His petition offers the court multiple paths forward — from preserving the existing framework to easing the burden of proving actual malice.
At the center of the dispute is CNN’s coverage of Dershowitz’s role in Donald Trump’s first impeachment trial in 2020. During the proceedings, Dershowitz advanced a broad interpretation of presidential power, arguing that actions taken to secure reelection could, under certain circumstances, align with the public interest. The remarks triggered sharp reactions and extensive media coverage.
CNN aired a specific excerpt of his argument, stating that if a president believes an action will help him get elected in the public interest, it would not amount to an impeachable quid pro quo. Dershowitz contends that the network repeatedly replayed that clip without sufficient context, creating a distorted portrait of his views and, in his words, making him appear unhinged.
Lower courts rejected his claims. A federal judge ruled in CNN’s favor in 2023, and an appeals court later concluded that Dershowitz failed to show the network acted with knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth — the very standard he now wants the Supreme Court to reconsider.
CNN has declined to comment on the latest filing.
Whether the justices will take up the case remains uncertain. The court accepts only a fraction of the petitions it receives, and it has so far resisted rewriting the rules of defamation law. But if the case is heard, it could reopen one of the most consequential debates in modern American media law — how far free speech protections should extend when powerful voices claim they’ve been wronged.
