Dominion Urges Federal Judge Not to Throw Out Lawsuit Against Sidney Powell:’Lawyers Don’t Have a License to Bend’
Attorneys for Dominion Voting Systems told a federal judge on Monday that conservative lawyer Sidney Powell must be held accountable for her out-of-court strikes on the voting system vendor or that the court dangers creating”unprecedented immunity for attorneys to wage disinformation efforts”
Filed with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia as an answer to Powell’s motion to dismiss from late March, Dominion’s attorneys are pushing back against claims made by the lawyer that her repetition of false conspiracy theories resorted to protected speech by the”attorney-advocate” speaking out on behalf of her own”preferred candidate”
Remember: Dominion is suing Powell (and several other people and media outlets) for overdue 2020 attempts to spell out former president Donald Trump’s reduction to Joe Biden by copying baseless and”error-filled” claims made by Powell and her allies who dead Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez had any connection to the vendor in addition to competitor Smartmatic-among various other attacks on the voting system companies.
Especially, the billion-dollar defamation lawsuit against Powell is not premised on her use of these conspiracy in court pleadings but, instead, during numerous television appearances with social media outlets.
“Attorneys don’t own a license to lie,” Dominion’s attorneys wrote in their 56-page reply movement, apparently referencing Powell’s book. “Although statements made in the courtroom are subject to specific statements that are not appliable [sic] into the out-of-court statements in issue in this instance, Powell asks the Court to manufacture a sweeping and unprecedented immunity for’attorney advocates’ who knowingly or recklessly spread defamatory falsehoods during televised disinformation campaigns involving advocacy to their’preferred candidate’–i.e., to make a propaganda exception to defamation liability. No such immunity has ever been settled and recognized law forecloses this argument.”
The reply movement goes on:
[A] law license is not a license to lie, and courts routinely allow defamation actions to proceed against attorneys according to claims made outside the court –even when these statements relate to litigation. Dominion’s defamation claims are not based on the claims Powell produced in court, but on Powell’s monthslong, continued defamatory effort that she peddled in D.C. and broadcast on television and on the web. Such out-of-court statements are not privileged.
Powell’s attorneys assert that her media appearances are not actionable statements that may be subject to defamation legislation under the country’s free speech program.
“First Amendment protections are not confined to filing lawsuits; they expand to actions that precede or are concomitant with the litigation, like soliciting clients, strengthening the possibility of legal redress, and gaining public assistance,” the motion to dismiss claims.
Within their Monday answer, Dominion’s attorneys dismissed this kind of thought by saying that Powell was effectively requesting the creation of an exemption to longstanding defamation law and precedent.
“The law doesn’t confer immunity from defamation liability only because speech could be distinguished as’governmental’ or as involving’advocacy,'” the filing by lawyer Megan L. Meier reads. “Really, courts across the nation have repeatedly held that defamation claims predicated on political language could proceed.”
“The response, under settled precedent, is not any. Powell’s statements are incremental because, since the Supreme Court has explained,’there is no constitutional value in false statements of reality’ Engaging in’advocacy’ doesn’t change that.”
Law&Crime reached out to Powell for comment on the story but no reply was forthcoming in the time of publication.
Read Dominion’s Most Up-to-date court filing beneath:
Have a trick we should know?