A teary-eyed former New York Times opinion editor apologized to Governor Palin while testifying at a retrial for her defamation case against the paper.

James Bennet, who wrote the June 2017 editorial that is at the heart of the case, told the jury he “blew it” when he erroneously tied Ms. Palin’s rhetoric to the 2011 shooting in Arizona that killed six people and gravely wounded Congresswoman Gabby Giffords. 

Shortly after the editorial, titled “America’s Lethal Politics,” was published, criticism poured into the paper. Mr. Bennet testified on Thursday that he “was very upset” after receiving an email from a former colleague who didn’t know why he tried to link the shootings to Ms. Palin, Law 360 reported.

A lawyer gave an emotional Mr. Bennet a box of tissues as he answered questions under oath.

“I do apologize to Gov. Palin for this mistake,” a choked up Mr. Bennet said. Mr. Bennet is the brother of Democratic Colorado Senator Michael Bennet, who is a possible presidential candidate in 2028. “I was really upset, and I still am, obviously.”

The Times acknowledged that the editorial was inaccurate, but claimed that it was an “honest mistake.” It published a correction below the editorial the next day and has vigorously defended itself.

“I am ultimately responsible for it, and I take responsibility for it,” Mr. Bennet testified, adding that he was not trying to smear Ms. Palin, the former Alaska governor and GOP vice presidential nominee.

Ms. Palin didn’t seem to accept the apology when asked about it on her way out of court.

“Let’s see, how many years ago was the untruth?” she replied to a reporter, according to the Associated Press. 

Ms. Palin is due to testify next week when the trial resumes.

Ms. Palin initially sued in 2017, claiming the editorial damaged her career as a political commentator. The paper was cleared of wrongdoing in the first trial in February 2022 but the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan ordered a retrial last year, citing errors made by Judge Jed Rakoff.

Judge Rakoff, 81, is overseeing the retrial despite the appeals court pointing the finger at him for saying he planned to toss the claims no matter what verdict the jury came up with. The jurors found out that information via a push alert on their phones as they deliberated.

The case is taking place amid a landscape where other media companies have settled high-profile defamation cases, including one brought by the president.

Ms. Palin insists that the Times’ conduct met the standard for defamation of public figures — “actual malice” — under the Supreme Court precedent that governs defamation law — New York Times v. Sullivan. Actual malice implies that the newspaper was aware that what it was publishing was incorrect but published it regardless.

Ms. Palin hopes to use the case to eventually have the Supreme Court revisit Sullivan where Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch have indicated they could support limits to the malice standard or getting rid of it.