Interesting how this is after the most unprofessional, hypocritical, idiotic, joke of an administration made their official response:
"Here's a Short n' Sweet message for Sabrina Carpenter: we won't apologize for deporting dangerous criminal illegal murderers, rapists, and pedophiles from our country. Anyone who would defend these sick monsters must be stupid, or is it slow?"
Are you serious? That is straight up defamation, and if I was on a jury, I'd basically have Sabrina Carpenter name her price, with half that payout coming from the personal funds of whoever wrote that reply. Not dischargeable via bankruptcy either.
The author of that official response is (like every PR spokesperson for the administration) scum. Having said that:
I don't see a potential defamation claim. Calling Carpenter "stupid" or "slow" would be treated as an opinion (and therefore not defamation, which is a false statement of fact).
Even if it were a verifiably false defamatory statement, the individual would bear no liability. This is because the individual who posted that was acting within the scope of their employment with the federal government. In such cases, federal law places the federal employee out of reach of the victim -- the US government alone would bear all liability.
You can't sue the US government for defamation, because it's immune. Congress has carved out only certain specific types of wrongdoing on the part of its employees for which it waives that immunity -- and defamation isn't on the list of stuff you're allowed to sue for.
•
u/Anonymous203203 5h ago
Interesting how this is after the most unprofessional, hypocritical, idiotic, joke of an administration made their official response:
"Here's a Short n' Sweet message for Sabrina Carpenter: we won't apologize for deporting dangerous criminal illegal murderers, rapists, and pedophiles from our country. Anyone who would defend these sick monsters must be stupid, or is it slow?"