James O’Keefe First Amendment legal dispute

A federal appeals court has overturned a $130,000 damages award against Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe and undercover reporter Alison Maass. The ruling by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals addresses a 2022 jury decision that found the pair liable for fraudulent misrepresentation and wiretapping stemming from a 2016 undercover investigation titled “Rigging the Election.”

The investigation targeted Democratic political consultants, including Robert Creamer of Democracy Partners. The legal dispute arose after Maass used a false identity to secure an unpaid internship to record private conversations.

Writing for the majority, Circuit Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson concluded that the damages award improperly punished the defendants for publishing the resulting news story, which violated the First Amendment. The court determined that because the protected content was the principal cause of the damages, the financial penalties were unconstitutional. While the panel noted that some information was gathered through fraudulent means and is not constitutionally protected, the court rejected the claim that Maass became a fiduciary of Democracy Partners through her deceptive internship.

The appellate ruling in Democracy Partners v. O’Keefe also addresses a legal strategy used to bypass the high bar for defamation claims against public figures established in New York Times v. Sullivan. The court ruled that the legal nature of an injury, rather than the specific label used by lawyers, determines the applicability of constitutional protections. This decision is intended to prevent plaintiffs from using alternative tort claims to circumvent the requirements of falsity and actual malice in disputes related to publication.