Postmaster’s Libel Lawsuit Towards Venture Veritas (Over Claims of Voter Fraud) Can Go Ahead


From Weisenbach v. Venture Veritas, determined in the present day by Erie County (Pa.) Court docket of Widespread Pleas Decide Marshall Piccinini:

Venture Veritas is a non-profit media group based by James O’Keefe, III. On November 5, 2020, simply two days after the November 3, 2020, presidential election, it printed a narrative claiming to have uncovered a voter fraud scheme orchestrated out of the USA Postal Service Normal Mail Facility in Erie, Pennsylvania. Particularly, the article and accompanying video alleged that Erie Postmaster, Robert Weisenbach, directed the backdating of mail-in ballots with a purpose to sway the end result of the presidential election in favor of candidate Joseph Biden. The report relied upon an nameless whistleblower, later revealed to be Richard Hopkins, a postal worker who claimed he overhead a dialog between Weisenbach and one other supervisor. Hopkins acknowledged that Weisenbach’s motive for backdating mail-in ballots was that he was a “Trump hater,” though, in actuality, Weisenbach was a supporter of President Donald Trump and voted for him on election day.

Within the days that adopted, Venture Veritas posted two extra video interviews with Hopkins the place he repeated his false claims, the latter after it was reported by information retailers that Hopkins had recanted his earlier allegations when confronted by postal inspectors, though Hopkins later claimed that recantation was coerced. The story quickly gained traction amongst these amplifying claims of voter fraud, together with President Trump himself. Weisenbach was compelled to go away Erie for a time after private particulars, together with his tackle, had been found and disseminated by readers of the Venture Veritas tales. Venture Veritas nonetheless maintains that the tales had been investigated and printed in keeping with requirements of “skilled, moral and accountable journalism.”

Weisenbach disagrees. He brings this lawsuit towards Hopkins, Venture Veritas, and O’Keefe, alleging claims of defamation and concerted tortious exercise. Defendants now search to dismiss the claims earlier than discovery has even begun by submitting Preliminary Objections to Weisenbach’s First Amended Criticism. That events body the motion in broad phrases as implicating competing beliefs mendacity on the coronary heart of our republic. Weisenbach argues that the tales had been “not investigative journalism[,]” however slightly “focused character assignation aimed toward undermining religion in the USA Postal Service and the outcomes of the 2020 Presidential election” having “no place in our nation.” Defendants contend that this case raises elementary considerations relating to freedom of the press, and that, pursuant to the First Modification to the USA Structure, we rely not on judges or juries to root out pernicious speech, however on competitors in an uninhibited market of concepts the place the reality will in the end prevail.

Regardless of the deserves of those lofty assertions, the Court docket’s activity in the present day in reviewing Defendants’ Preliminary Objections is far more modest. First, the Court docket should determine whether or not it lacks material jurisdiction over the claims towards Hopkins in mild of the Federal Tort Claims Act, which vests federal courts with unique jurisdiction over actions introduced towards federal workers who trigger damage whereas performing inside the scope of their employment. Second, in assessing Defendants’ Objections within the nature of demurrers, the Court docket should merely decide “whether or not, on the info averred, the regulation says with certainty that no restoration is feasible.” For the explanations that comply with, the Court docket solutions each of these questions within the unfavorable and consequently overrules Defendants’ Preliminary Objections to the First Amended Criticism….

It’s obvious that the events understand the occasions of the times following the 2020 presidential election by wildly completely different lenses. At the moment’s Opinion recounts these days by the eyes of Robert Weisenbach. [This is because in deciding a motion to dismiss, the court must assume the accuracy of a plaintiff’s plausibly pleaded factual assertions. -EV] As he sees it, Richard Hopkins was performing properly exterior the scope of his employment when he provided false claims of mail-in poll backdating to Venture Veritas, and so, jurisdiction over the claims now levied towards him doesn’t lie solely in federal courtroom pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act.

Likewise, Weisenbach’s averments are legally ample to make out claims of defamation and concerted tortious exercise towards all Defendants, even below the demanding precise malice commonplace. Whether or not Weisenbach will be capable of supply satisfactory proof to assist his claims, and whether or not a jury would in the end be keen to credit score such proof after listening to each side of the story, stays to be seen. For now, it is sufficient to maintain that the averments set forth within the Amended Criticism are ample as a matter of regulation to allow the motion to proceed to discovery, the place the reality of those claims can start to be examined within the crucible of our adversarial system.

The opinion is 58 pages lengthy, and I am afraid I haven’t got the time to get by it now, however I believed I might briefly excerpt it right here.

Congratulations to David Houck of Ogg, Murphy & Perkosky, P.C and John Langford of Defend Democracy for the pointer.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Friday MEGA MILLIONS® jackpot is $660 million