New Zealand Cocaine Use Remains Elevated, Wastewater Data Shows
Police wastewater testing estimated 6.8 kilograms of cocaine consumed weekly in sampled areas in the second quarter of 2026, below a late-2025 peak but well above 2019 levels.
Supreme Court Rejects Roy Moore Appeal in $8.2 Million Defamation Case
4 min read
Trendy TodayEditorial Staff
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore’s appeal in a defamation case arising from a political advertisement during his 2017 U.S. Senate campaign.
The Court’s October 5 order lists Moore v. Senate Majority PAC, No. 26-122, among the petitions denied. The action leaves in place an April 2026 ruling by the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that vacated an $8.2 million jury verdict Moore had won against the PAC.
A denial of review does not mean the Supreme Court endorsed the appeals court’s reasoning. The justices did not provide an explanation for declining the case.
What the Roy Moore Defamation Case Was About
The dispute traces back to Alabama’s 2017 special election for the U.S. Senate. Moore, the Republican nominee, sued Senate Majority PAC over a television advertisement aired during the campaign. The PAC funded Highway 31, which ran ads opposing Moore.
Moore argued that the ad placed statements from separate news reports next to one another in a way that falsely suggested he had solicited sex from a 14-year-old girl at a shopping mall. His lawyers said the combined presentation created a defamatory implication that did not appear in the underlying reports. Senate Majority PAC disputed the claim and defended the ad.
In 2022, a federal jury found in Moore’s favor on defamation and false-light invasion-of-privacy claims and awarded him $8.2 million in compensatory damages.
Appeals Court Overturned the Jury’s Award
On April 24, 2026, the 11th Circuit concluded that the evidence did not satisfy the constitutional actual-malice standard that applies when a public figure sues for defamation. It vacated the verdict and directed the district court to enter judgment for Senate Majority PAC.
That standard generally requires clear and convincing proof that a defendant knew a statement was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. In a case alleging defamation by implication, the appeals court also examined whether there was sufficient evidence that the PAC intended to convey the allegedly defamatory meaning.
Moore sought Supreme Court review after the appeals ruling. The Court had separately rejected an emergency request in June to pause the appeals court’s decision while he pursued that appeal.
Why the Supreme Court Decision Matters
The immediate result is that Moore’s $8.2 million verdict will not be restored through this Supreme Court appeal. The appeals court’s judgment remains in place.
The case drew attention because it concerned political advertising and the high burden public figures face when bringing defamation claims. Its central question was whether the ad’s arrangement of individually sourced statements conveyed a false implication with the required state of mind.
The Supreme Court did not issue a written opinion on those broader questions. Its order resolves Moore’s petition for review, rather than creating a new Supreme Court ruling on political-advertising or defamation law.
Background to the 2017 Senate Race
Moore’s campaign was under national scrutiny after several women made allegations about his conduct when they were teenagers. Leigh Corfman said Moore inappropriately touched her in 1979 when she was 14 and he was 32. Moore denied that allegation and denied wrongdoing.
Moore lost the special election to Democrat Doug Jones. The later lawsuit focused more narrowly on the wording and presentation of the Senate Majority PAC-backed ad and whether the legal standard for liability had been met.
