Using Trump's own legal arguments, Pulitzer Board seeks stay of Trump defamation case while he's in office

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: CNN Business

Updated 5:41 PM EST, Mon January 27, 2025


CNN — The Pulitzer Prize board is asking a judge to hit pause on a defamation case President Donald Trump filed against it until his presidency is over, using Trump’s own legal arguments against him.

Trump sued the Pulitzer Board in 2022 after it released a statement standing by awarding the 2018 national reporting prize to the Washington Post and New York Times for their coverage of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and its alleged connections to the Trump campaign.

In their motion filed on Monday, the Pulitzer Board pointed out that Trump previously sought stays in other civil lawsuits where he was the defendant, saying the suits should be halted while he is in office because of questions of whether the US Constitution bars state courts from exercising jurisdiction over the a sitting president.

This past Friday, the motion notes, Trump’s team requested a stay in a case investors in Trump’s social media company brought against him. In that case, Trump’s team argued “(c)ommonsense favors a stay of this case until the end of the President’s term,” so that “President Trump can devote his time and energies to America’s problems.” Trump made the same argument during his first term in a defamation case brought against him by Summer Zervos, a former contestant on his show “The Apprentice.”

Read more: https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/27/business/pulitzer-board-trump-defamation/index.html

[JMCKUSICK]

1. Good on them.

[Irish_Dem]

2. Trump is determined to stop anyone speaking the truth about him.

And to send a strong warning to others.

[SomewhereInTheMiddle]

3. What is good for the goose is good for the gander

I think people should be using Trumps own words and actions against him and his supporters as frequently as possible. This is a great example.

I would hope any reasonable judge (and I hope they have them in Florida) would buy the argument that if Trump cannot be sued because it would interfere with is work as president then by the same argument Trump cannot sue anyone because it would interfere with his job as president.

He should not be allowed to have it both ways.

This can be seen as a more palatable form of malicious compliance.

Not that I think malicious compliance is an altogether bad idea. I would like to see all immigration laws and executive actions carefully applied to his wife, kids, and her family to make sure they are in full compliance. His "gender at conception" order should be promulgated on all federal properties and contracts. No more men's rooms as we are ALL female. Etc. etc. etc.

I am sure those far cleverer than I will come up with the right ideas. As the Pulitzer Prize board has done here.