Miller v. Sawant was a case decided by Ninth Circuit Judges William Fletcher, Carlos Bea, and John Owens. In February 2016, Seattle police officers Miller and Spaulding fatally shot Che Andre Taylor, a Black man, during an arrest attempt. The officers filed a defamation complaint against Seattle City Council member Kshama Sawant based on her public remarks alleging that Taylor’s shooting was murder by the police.
The court granted summary judgment in favor of Sawant as Miller and Spaulding failed to prove essential elements of their defamation claim. Sawant’s statements were deemed opinions rather than actionable statements of fact, were not shown to be false, and were not made with actual malice.
The court found that Sawant’s statements were opinions expressed at politically charged public protests, where exaggeration and personal opinion were expected. Sawant framed her remarks within a larger political context of racial injustice, indicating that her statements were not meant to convey exclusive knowledge of the situation.
Miller and Spaulding’s argument that Sawant’s statements were false because they were never charged with murder was dismissed. Sawant clarified that she used the term “murder” to express her belief in the officers’ wrongful actions, not to imply criminal charges against them.
Regarding actual malice, the court determined that Miller and Spaulding, as public figures, failed to demonstrate that Sawant acted with knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth. Sawant’s pre-statement research and community discussions were considered in the court’s ruling.
The Ninth Circuit’s decision in 2021 allowed the case to proceed, focusing on the “of and concerning element” of the defamation claims. The court’s analysis categorized Sawant’s use of the term “murder” as opinion based on disclosed or widely known facts, rather than an implicit factual assertion.
