Trump's right about CNN -- but his lawsuit will fail, and deservedly

To be clear, it’s tedious that so many on the Left are so ready to connect Trump to Hitler. Such exquisite silliness does a disservice to history and to the moral import therein. But silliness does not a U.S. defamation case make — certainly not in the context of commentary. Indeed, Trump’s own argument is weakened in this regard. The former president has spent years lambasting CNN as an outlet that deprioritized reporting in favor of commentary. Does he now contend its arguments are to be taken as statements of fact?

Trump’s lawsuit will fail. Rightly so. …

In the United States, a finding of reporting-based defamation against public figures such as Trump requires a court’s finding of “actual malice.” In this case, Trump’s lawyers must prove either that CNN knew said statements were false or recklessly and deliberately aired them without concern for accuracy. As idiotic as the Nazi-Trump comparisons are, CNN can contend that they exist at the intersection of political theory and contemporary political action. And this is all CNN needs to say to justify these statements.

While that might upset some Trump supporters, there is much more at stake here. U.S. defamation law does not exist to protect the media, per se, but rather the right of the people to good government. To understand the risks of defamatory law uncoupled from the public interest, one need only look to Europe.