Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    The Missing Defendants In Sherrod v. Breitbart Lawsuit

    The Missing Defendants In Sherrod v. Breitbart Lawsuit

    Namely, anyone from the Obama administration, the people who actually “forced” Sherrod to resign.

    Mark Levin makes the point (and gives a nice shout out to my post Dissecting Shirley Sherrod’s Complaint Against Andrew Breitbart) :

    ——————————————–
    Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
    Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!
    Bookmark and Share

    DONATE

    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.

    Tags:
    ,

    Comments

    So Breitbart will implead them.

    Sherrod cannot make out a defamation, false light, or IIED claim against Obama or anyone else in the administration because it would be nearly impossible to show "actual malice" (the standard everyone seems to agree would apply in this matter) on the part of such defendants.

    Sherrod MAY have a claim of wrongful termination against Obama, Vilsack etc., but if she is an "officer of the United States", my guess is that she may be terminated at any time for whatever reason

    Heard this earlier today. Love it when the brilliant Great One reads your blog on his show, and shares his praises! 😀

    The "Great One" will always be Jackie Gleason. The snarky Levin, being so excessively loathing and disdainful, has really squandered any stature of being able to bestow honor on anyone. Levin is the one who should be honored if a blogger as gifted as Prof. Jacobson were to mention him.

    Suing federal officers for damages is extremely difficult. The government has placed all sorts of roadblocks. The only direct suit for damages against a federal officer is a so-called Bivens action which is the judicially created equivalent of a 42 USC 1983 action against state and local officials. It applies only to denials of constitutional rights. The Federal Tort Claims Act excludes claims based upon defamation. The only waiver of sovereign immunity for damages I am aware of is the Tucker Act which would not apply.

    As much as I enjoy Mark Levin, I think that is really good reason for not naming people when there is no right to sue.

    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend