A defamation lawsuit against popular Fox News host Judge Jeanine from BLM activist and leader DeRay McKesson has been thrown out.
JUST IN: Fox News host ‘Judge’ Jeanine Pirro wins defamation lawsuit from Black Lives Matter activist DeRay Mckesson
— BNL NEWS (@BreakingNLive) March 26, 2019
Supporters of Judge Jeanine were pleased.
We miss you Judge
— Jason (@Jason40801776) March 26, 2019
More Winning – congrats @JudgeJeanine
— Nancy for Trump ⭐️⭐️⭐️ (@NancyforTrump) March 26, 2019Loading...
Thank you GOD! We love the Judge!!!
— Kath Lomax (@FrmJournalist) March 26, 2019
A petition to Fox News demanding they bring back Judge Jeanine from her suspension or face boycott has over 7,500 signatures.
MagaVoter shares a parent company with the petition site.
A judge has tossed a defamation lawsuit filed by Black Lives Matter activist DeRay McKesson against Jeanine Pirro on the grounds that the Fox News host specializes in “loud, caustic” opinion.
McKesson, who is also a noted speaker and podcast host, sued Pirro in December 2017 for claiming on-air that he had “directed” violence against a Baton Rouge police officer. McKesson said that wasn’t true.
Pirro argued that she was merely expressing the opinion that the injured officer could sue McKesson, arguing he is liable for the officer’s injuries.
Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Robert Kalish agreed that Pirro had the right to express such an opinion, and noted that Pirro’s own lawyer had described her shtick as “loud, caustic and hard hitting.”
“Pirro’s lack of temperament, and caustic commentary is what she is known, celebrated and frequently criticized for,” Kalish wrote.
“However divisive one might find the subject two-minute sequence, the law of this state protects the expressions of opinion it represents.”
The judge noted there were clear racial overtones in the September 2017 segment that aired on “Fox & Friends.”
“That the Court find’s Pirro statement’s to be protected statements of opinion does not mean this Court agrees with Pirro’s opinions or condones her behavior or rhetoric. This Court is not blind to the undertones in this segment,” Kalish wrote.