A Brown County judge has dismissed failed U.S. Senate candidate Eric Hovde’s defamation suit over a campaign ad that claimed the businessman “rigged” the system, finding the spot was an expression of opinion and not defamatory.
Judge Donald Zuidmulder also found there was some truth in claims made by WinSenate, the political arm of Senate Dems.
The 30-second spot included a series of allegations, including that “he’s sheltering his wealth in shady tax havens around the world.” Hovde argued that falsely claimed he was actively involved with investments in the Cayman Islands and Bermuda.
According to Zuidmulder’s ruling Thursday, Hovde didn’t dispute that he had invested in publicly traded companies located in Bermuda or that he had managed assets “funded by foreign investors in companies based in the Cayman Islands.”
“Whether Hovde was making use of international tax havens at the time of the airing of the advertisement is inconsequential in that the statement, ‘Hovde shelters his wealth in shady tax havens’ is substantially true,” Zuidmulder wrote.
Hovde didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment left with his lawyer.
Zuidmulder on Thursday granted motions to dismiss the suit filed by both WinSenate and seven broadcast outlets that ran the spot.
WinSenate attorney Uzoma Nkwonta said the ruling confirms the group didn’t make any defamatory comments about Hovde despite his “desperate allegations amid his losing campaign.”
“We are pleased that the court correctly recognized that political speech deserves high levels of protection,” Nkwonta said. “This decision underscores the importance of public debate concerning candidates for public office.”
WinSenate began airing the ad in June, making the claim Hovde had “rigged the system to rake in thirty million in government subsidies and loans,” along with the claim about “shady tax havens.”
Hovde demanded TV stations take down the ad, insisting the claims were false. The stations declined, and Hovde in August filed the suit against WinSenate and seven stations that aired the spot.
Zuidmulder rejected Hovde’s claim that the term “rigged” necessarily implicated that the businessman engaged in illegal conduct. He wrote it was undisputed that “Hovde received $30 million in government subsidies and loans and that Hovde’s family negotiated for these subsidies and loans.” He found the claim Hovde rigged the system was “of mixed opinion and fact” and the underlying facts are “undisputed.”
Zuidmulder issued his ruling on filings from the parties and before allowing the case to a next phase that could’ve included depositions as part of the discovery phase and additional legal costs. Zuidmulder wrote he could reach his decision on the law without going through those additional steps and noted defendants’ concern on the “chilling effect” on their free speech rights that could’ve caused.
“The Court finds this concern most potent when a defamation claim concerns highly political speech, such as here where the challenged statements were made in the context of a highly contested United States Senate race,” he wrote.
