CNN's General Counsel Rejects Trump Campaign Demand: 'That's How Free Speech Works'
"It is yet another bad faith attempt by the campaign to threaten litigation to muzzle speech it does not want voters to read or hear," wrote CNN general counsel David Vigilante.
June 11, 2020 at 04:37 PM
5 minute read
CNN executive vice president and top lawyer David Vigilante is getting plenty of attention for his withering reply to the Trump presidential campaign's demand for a retraction and apology for releasing the results of a political poll.
"To the extent we have received legal threats from political leaders in the past, they have typically come from countries like Venezuela or other regimes where there is little or no respect for a free and independent media," Vigilante wrote in a letter rejecting the Trump campaign's demand.
Since CNN posted the June 10 letter on Twitter, it has been retweeted more than 41,000 times, and has more than 106,000 "likes."
Ted Boutrous Jr., a partner at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher in Los Angeles who has reacted to earlier threats from the Trump campaign against CNN, applauded Vigilante's letter.
"The Trump campaign has been engaged in an abusive, frivolous campaign against freedom of expression and freedom of the press and it really is despicable. It's contrary to our American traditions and First Amendment traditions," he said Thursday in an interview.
"The U.S. is supposed to be the beacon of protecting rights of individuals and journalists. This is a penny-ante effort to chill free speech," he added.
The CNN poll in question found that presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden was ahead of Donald Trump by 14 points. The survey was based on a phone poll that independent research and marketing firm SSRS conducted from June 2-5 with 1,259 respondents.
The poll was released on June 8. The next day, Trump campaign attorney Jenna Ellis and chief operating officer Michael Glassner sent CNN president Jeff Zucker a cease and desist letter demanding an apology and retraction.
The demand letter alleged that the poll was "designed to mislead American voters through a biased questionnaire and skewed sampling."
"It's a stunt and a phony poll to cause voter suppression, stifle momentum and enthusiasm for the President, and present a false view generally of the actual support across America for the President," the letter also stated.
In CNN's next-day response, Vigilante wrote: "To my knowledge, this is the first time in its 40-year history that CNN had been threatened with legal action because an American politician or campaign did not like CNN's polling results."
Attempts to speak with Vigilante, who is based at CNN's headquarters in Atlanta, and Trump campaign representatives were unsuccessful.
In its demand letter, the Trump campaign stated that it had hired McLaughlin & Associates to independently assess CNN's poll and asserted that the Republican research firm determined that the poll was biased.
"It's a poll of 1,259 adults—not even registered voters, let alone likely voters. Also, it was done between June 2nd and 5th, before the great economic news from last Friday. Further, the questions and topics selected likely biased the poll further," the letter stated.
Of the respondents who were asked if they "approve or disapprove of the way Donald Trump is handling his job as president," 57% disapproved, while 38% approved and 5% had no opinion, according to CNN's poll.
The survey also showed that 63% of respondents disapproved of Trump's handling of race relations.
In CNN's response to the Trump campaign, Vigilante brought up McLaughlin's infamously inaccurate 2014 poll showing Eric Cantor leading Dave Brat by 34 points in Virginia's Republican primary. Brat won by 11 points.
"In any event, McLaughlin was able to evaluate and criticize CNN's most recent poll because CNN is transparent and publishes its methodology along with its polling results," Vigilante wrote. "Because of this, McLaughlin was free to publish his own critique of CNN's analysis and share his criticisms across the U.S. media landscape. That's how free speech works. It's the American way."
Vigilante concluded by dismissing the cease and desist letter as "factually and legally baseless."
"It is yet another bad faith attempt by the campaign to threaten litigation to muzzle speech it does not want voters to read or hear. Your allegations and demands are rejected in their entirety," he wrote.
Read More:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllGC With Deep GM Experience Takes Legal Reins of Power Management Giant
2 minute readUS Reviewer of Foreign Transactions Sees More Political, Policy Influence, Say Observers
'Unlawful Release'?: Judge Grants Preliminary Injunction in NASCAR Antitrust Lawsuit
3 minute readEx-Red Robin CLO Joins Norton Rose Fulbright After Helping Sell Latest Employer for $4.9 Billion
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250