A judge threw out Covington teen Nick Sandmann’s $250 million defamation lawsuit against The Washington Post

Screenshot via @2020fight Twitter

A federal judge dismissed a Kentucky teenager’s $250 million defamation lawsuit against The Washington Post over its coverage of a viral confrontation in January.
A video showed the student, Nick Sandmann, staring down Native American activist Nathan Phillips at the Lincoln Memorial as a group of Sandmann’s peers chanted and smiled.
Sandmann argued in his lawsuit that The Post had defamed him in seven articles and three tweets by portraying him as hostile and aggressive towards Phillips.
But the judge ruled in The Post’s favor, writing in his opinion that the statements from the newspaper’s coverage often did not single out Sandmann in particular, and merely quoted Phillips’ opinions, which are considered protected speech under the First Amendment.
Visit INSIDER’s homepage for more stories.

A federal judge on Friday threw out a $250 million lawsuit against The Washington Post over its coverage of a widely scrutinized confrontation earlier this year between a Kentucky high-school student and a Native American activist.

Nick Sandmann, the student who filed the lawsuit, argued in his lawsuit that The Post had defamed him in seven articles and three tweets by portraying him as hostile or aggressive towards the activist, Nathan Phillips.

A video of the pair went viral in January showing Sandmann, wearing a Make America Great Again hat, staring down Phillips at the Lincoln Memorial as a group of Sandmann’s peers chanted and smiled. The clip initially drew widespread outrage and prompted critics to condemn the mostly white group of students for apparently intimidating a person of color.

But more footage of the incident quickly emerged that cast the interaction in a different light, showing that Phillips’ group of activists had approached the students, not the other way around.

Though Phillips told The Post in its original story that Sandmann had been "smirking" at him and blocking his path while his peers chanted "build the wall," Sandmann later explained that he had been confused and stood still to "diffuse the situation." Beyond that, no chants of "build the wall" could be heard in any of the footage from the incident.

Bryan Woolston/AP

But the judge, William Bertelsman, wrote in his opinion that even if Phillips’ account to The Post was inaccurate, the characterizations were clearly opinions, which are protected speech under the First Amendment.

For example, The Post quoted Phillips as saying he "felt threatened" by the "smirking" teenagers and accused them of "taunting" his fellow activists. But Bertelsman wrote in his opinion that what constitutes feeling threatened, or smirked at, or taunted was subjective, and that the characterizations were not facts that could be proven incorrect.

Beyond that, many of the statements Sandmann had argued were defamatory did not refer to Sandmann at all, and instead referred to "teens," "they," and "a few people."

"These statements are not actionable because they are not about Sandmann," Bertelsman wrote in his opinion.

Bertelsman wrote that it could be true that Sandmann’s intent during the confrontation with Phillips was "to calm the situation and not impede or block anyone," but noted that "Phillips did not see it that way."

"The Post is not liable for publishing these opinions," Bertelsman wrote.

Sandmann’s father, Ted Sandmann, said in a statement Friday that he would appeal Bertelsman’s decision.

"I believe fighting for justice for my son and family is of vital national importance," the statement said, according to The Post. "If what was done to Nicholas is not legally actionable, then no one is safe."

NOW WATCH: Nxivm leader Keith Raniere has been convicted. Here’s what happened inside his sex-slave ring that recruited actresses and two billionaire heiresses.