Defamation and First Amendment Law

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit on March 17, 2026, refused to rehear President Donald Trump’s defamation lawsuit against CNN over its use of the term “Big Lie” to describe his false 2020 election claims, leaving in place a prior panel ruling that tossed the case. A three‑judge panel, including two Trump appointees, had unanimously upheld a Florida district court’s 2023 dismissal, finding that CNN’s statements were protected opinion rather than provably false facts and that Trump failed to show the network acted with actual malice, the constitutional standard for public‑figure defamation. Trump argued that the “Big Lie” label was meant to liken him to Adolf Hitler and Nazi propaganda, but the appellate panel called that theory “unpersuasive” and said treating the phrase as a concrete factual assertion was “untenable,” with his remaining claims deemed “meritless.” The full court’s denial came without explanation or dissent, and Trump’s remaining option is to seek Supreme Court review, even though the justices recently declined to revisit the actual malice standard when asked by a Trump donor. The outcome reinforces strong First Amendment protections for political commentary about election lies at a moment when public debates about disinformation and media liability are intensifying online and in Congress.