The New York Times on Tuesday petitioned the Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for an en banc rehearing of a panel decision to revive Sarah Palin’s defamation suit, which targets the paper over a since-corrected editorial that linked her political action committee to a 2011 mass shooting that left a former congresswoman seriously injured.

Attorneys for the Times argued the Aug. 6 opinion from a three-judge Second Circuit panel “misapprehended two bedrock First Amendment principles” concerning allegations of actual malice and protected statements of opinion and said that, if not corrected, the opinion would have the effect of dampening political debate.

The filing argued that the panel incorrectly premised its decision on a finding of recklessness on the part of the editorial’s author and allegations that the misstatements were motivated by political animus. The panel, the Times’ lawyers said, also employed the wrong constitutional standard for deciding whether Palin’s claims covered non-actionable expressions of opinion.

“The panel’s opinion conflicts with the Supreme Court’s and this circuit’s prior decisions, materially altering both the actual malice standard and the constitutional protections afforded expressions of opinion,” Jay Ward Brown, a partner with Ballard Spahr wrote in the 18-page filing.

The motion would put to a vote of the Second Circuit’s 11 active justices whether the issues should be reheard by the full court. Such requests, however, are rarely granted, and the court recently reiterated that it maintains a “tradition” of rehearing.

The unanimous panel’s decision earlier this month reversed a Southern District judge’s decision to dismiss the suit for making no showing of actual malice by the Times.

Palin has claimed the editorial in question, called “America’s Lethal Politics,” linked her to a 2011 shooting at a political event in Tucson, Arizona, at the hands of Jared Loughner. Six people were killed in the shooting; U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Arizona, was shot in the head but survived.

Prior to the shooting in Tucson, a political action committee controlled by Palin distributed a flier showing the geographic location of Giffords’ district and those of other elected officials under stylized crosshairs.

The Times’ own reporting, and an ABC News story hyperlinked to the editorial, stated there was no link between the political literature and Loughner’s actions. The Times twice corrected the editorial.

Read More: