iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Shirley Sherrod Case Against Andrew Breitbart Begins

Shirley Sherrod Andrew Breitbart

MARY CLARE JALONICK   07/19/11 07:13 PM ET   AP

WASHINGTON — Lawyers for conservative blogger Andrew Breitbart asked Tuesday that a federal judge throw out a defamation case that former government employee Shirley Sherrod brought against him.

Sherrod was ousted from her job as a Georgia rural development official last year after Breitbart posted an edited video of her making supposedly making racist remarks. She sued Breitbart, his employee Larry O'Connor and an unnamed defendant for defamation and emotional distress. Sherrod's lawyers say the unnamed defendant is the person who they believe passed the video on to Breitbart.

The video on Andrew Breitbart's website turned out to be edited, and when Sherrod's full speech to an NAACP group earlier that year came to light, it became clear that her remarks about an initial reluctance to help a white farmer were not racist but an attempt at telling a story of racial reconciliation. Once that was obvious, Sherrod received public apologies from the administration – even from President Barack Obama himself – and an offer to come back to the Department of Agriculture, which she declined.

In the first hearing in the case Tuesday, exactly a year to the day Sherrod was ousted, lawyers for Breitbart argued that Sherrod's case is an attempt to dampen free speech and should be dismissed. They also argued to have it dismissed under a District of Columbia statute that aims to prevent the silencing of critics through lawsuits.

If the case is not dismissed, Breitbart and O'Connor's lawyers argued to have it moved from the District of Columbia to California, where the two men live. U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon said he would consider all of the requests but did not indicate how he would rule.

Sherrod's complaint says the incident has affected her sleep and caused her back pain. It contends that she was damaged by having her "integrity, impartiality and motivations questioned, making it difficult (if not impossible) for her to continue her life's work assisting poor farmers in rural areas" even though she was invited to come back to the Agriculture Department.

Breitbart's original posting a year ago showed an excerpt of a March 2010 speech to an NAACP group in which Sherrod talked about her reluctance to help a white farmer who came to her more than two decades ago when she worked at a farm aid nonprofit group. The video was posted amid ongoing friction between the NAACP and the tea party movement, each of which were accusing the other of having racist elements among their ranks.

The blogger said at the time that the video showed the NAACP condoning racist comments from a government official.

The full video, however, shows Sherrod explaining to the audience how she eventually became friends with the farmer and helped him save his land from foreclosure. .

___

Find Mary Clare Jalonick on Twitter at http://twitter.com/MCJalonick

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
Filed by Nick Wing  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 936
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (29 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chrystal Eastland
Scott me up Beamy!
10:22 PM on 08/17/2011
Guess what makes me even sicker than this guy not ONLY getting away with falsifying a video, but the way she was forced to resign before the truth was attained.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Robgrut
08:52 PM on 08/02/2011
Sherrod is a very shady character. Just research her dirty dealings in the Pigford suit.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
D.C. Douglas
Actor, voice over artist, and part-time gadfly.
06:44 PM on 07/25/2011
And just in time, Andrew Breitbart's new website goes online: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5maMGDV1gvg
03:50 PM on 07/21/2011
When you present something in public with a reckless disregard of the truth, then that's libel/slander (depending on how it's presented. It's not a matter of silencing--the cat's out of the bag, and these creeps intentionally let it out in a ward of asthmatics, so to speak, and that is reckless.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
08:24 PM on 07/20/2011
I hope she kicks his a@$
05:38 PM on 07/20/2011
Shame on people who take advantage of other people because of words. I think that is bearing false witness which historically has been considered a sin. Can you see the damage that is done? It never ends. Move on and be positive. Please.
03:53 PM on 07/20/2011
All of the negative comments about Breitbart based on what? Nobody making comments on here knows what happened for sure, all of the evidence hasn't been released, but you all talk like you know for sure what really happened, which you don't.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:49 PM on 07/20/2011
We know what happened. It's self evident. It's in the civil complaint.
photo
Boduognat
Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'entrate.
03:12 PM on 07/24/2011
Well we know what happened: Breitbart edited a video tape to alter it's apparent context with the specific purpose of causing damage to the work and career of Mrs. Sherrod, who tally by coincidence happens to be African American, to portray her as a racist,.

The fact that he hides behind "freedom of speech" makes his actions even more despicable, as he apparently lacks the cojones to either stand up to this Lady, or offer his apologies.
03:45 PM on 07/20/2011
Why isn't she suing the White House and the USDA?
photo
Boduognat
Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'entrate.
03:13 PM on 07/24/2011
Because the White House or USDA did not deliberately try to destroy her work or her career, or portray her as a racist person ny editing a video of Mrs. Sherrod and altering the context of her words.

It is really not so difficult, you know.... if you just try a little bit.
04:50 PM on 07/24/2011
Having Shirley resign came from the White House & the FDA, before any evidence was shown, wrongful termination? Emotional distress?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
goatboyslim
It's a good day to die,but I prefer to wait
02:53 PM on 07/20/2011
Andrew Breitbart is what he is, and everyone should know that, which to my mind makes Tom Vilsack the true villain in this case. Had he done even the most rudimentary of investigations he could have figured out what was going on here. It makes me think he was looking for the least excuse to to fire her, and didn't care that the reason was being provided by a known serial liar.
03:54 PM on 07/21/2011
Agree with some of that, but Breitbart should reap what he sowed. Then she can go after Corn Oil Vilsack.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
stonemann
To argue with an idiot, can mistake you for one.
02:47 PM on 07/20/2011
Mr. Breitbart, your free speech is protected only if the speech is truthful. In Ms Sherrod's case, your speech was not, and it's clear to most that it was intentional. So, Ms Sherrod says she wants to get back at you, isn't that what law suits are for? Well, you gave her the ammo to do it with and I wish her much success. I hope you get every bit of what you deserve.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Maxcat19
Galatians 6:7-9
02:45 PM on 07/20/2011
Weiner was using free speech, Breitbart had no problem with him paying a price for exercising free speech. Though with the Courts the way they are now, who knows what will happen.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
slycolyf
slice of life
02:19 PM on 07/20/2011
yay!
01:54 PM on 07/20/2011
I hope she takes him for all he owns.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ghostberry
All empty souls tend toward extreme opinions.
01:27 PM on 07/20/2011
It`s free speech Breitbart, not free lies.
12:41 PM on 07/20/2011
This should be a slam-dunk.
The guy ruined her with lies.
Hope she gets EVERYTHING he has but his shorts AND an injunction is put on him that if he EVER does this type of thing again he will go to JAIL.
BTW Just who supports this slime-ball monetarily? Follow the money and we will be better informed as to who to watch for more lies and chicanery.