Former federal prosecutor explains why Sarah Palin's case never had a prayer

Former Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK) had her case dismissed by a judge in New York on Monday on the basis that Palin and her legal team had failed to provide evidence that the New York Times acted with malice when it published an allegedly defamatory editorial about her in 2017.

Former federal prosecutor and legal commentator Renato Mariotti explained on his Twitter account that it's extremely difficult for a public figure to prove malicious intent, and the Times was quick to issue a correction to its Palin editorial, which meant that her attorneys had a very high bar to reach.

Mariotti explained that the "high bar is meant to ensure that lawsuits don't limit or silence media companies like the New York Times."

READ MORE: Sarah Palin's libel suit against New York Times gets thrown out by judge -- although an appeal is likely

Among the most difficult claims of defamation is one against a public official. In this case, as an editorial or commentary isn't a straight report of facts, legal analyst Harry Litman and Joyce White Vance also remarked.

This legal loss is another in a long line of Palin failures, as she hasn't won anything since her gubernatorial campaign in 2006.

See Mariotti's full assessment below:

It is very difficult for a plaintiff to establish \u201cactual malice\u201d in a defamation case, so it\u2019s not surprising that Sarah Palin failed to do so here.\n\nThis high bar is meant to ensure that lawsuits don\u2019t limit or silence media companies like the New York Times.https://twitter.com/davidfolkenflik/status/1493320498935119882\u00a0\u2026

— Renato Mariotti (@Renato Mariotti) 1644871386

BREAKING NEWS: Trump Org's longtime accountants sever ties and warn ex-president's financial statements can't be trusted

Trump's longtime accountants sever ties/ warn ex-president's financial statements can't be trusted www.youtube.com