Former Rep. Devin Nunes (R-California) hasn’t been shy about filing defamation lawsuits that many legal experts considered frivolous according to the standards outlined in U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark 1964 ruling in New York Times v. Sullivan. In April 2023, U.S. District Court Judge C.J. Williams threw out a Nunes lawsuit against Esquire. And in 2020, Judge John Marshall ruled that Nunes couldn’t sue two parody accounts on X, formerly Twitter (one of which was named Devin Nunes’ Cow and mocked him from the perspective of a fictional cow).
Nunes also sued NBC/Universal in response to comments from top-rated host Rachel Maddow. But on Friday, August 1, U.S. District Judge Kevin Castel dismissed that lawsuit, ruling that Nunes failed to show actual malice.
In New York Times v. Sullivan, the Warren Court ruled that libel has to involve actual malice — a ruling that, 61 years ago, countless journalists and legal experts hailed as a major victory for the First Amendment and freedom of the press.
READ MORE: Don’t ‘have any other choice’: Outrage grows in the midwest as political crisis spirals
Castel’s ruling is generating a lot of comments on X, formerly Twitter.
Reuters Jonathan Landay noted that Nunes’ lawsuit involved “a comment by Rachel Maddow about his dealings with a suspected Russian agent.”
X user EJW commented, “Perpetual Loser Nunes — loses again.”
Another X user, Sadie NYC, wrote, “Sucks to be you dude. Trump Media CEO Nunes loses defamation lawsuit over Rachel Maddow show.”
READ MORE: ‘Middle-aged Manson girls’: Far-right ‘bloodthirsty’ MAGA women mocked in scathing take-down
Politico’s Josh Gerstein observed, “BREAKING: Judge tosses fmr Rep. Nunes’ libel suit re MSNBC report on handling of package from Russia-linked legislator. Maddow & producer said they relied on POLITICO report suggesting Nunes sat on package, didn’t see later 1 saying he gave it to FBI.”
X user Bill Thatcher wrote, “@DevinNunes Such an insecure little weenie. Did she hurt your little feelings?! Devin, the continuing poster boy for thin-skin, low IQ, politically deaf white boys.”
READ MORE: The landmark Supreme Court case that saved the press – and why the Trump admin wants it gone