Mark Robinson Files Frivolous Lawsuit Against CNN and a Local Musician
Due to North Carolina's lack of an anti-SLAPP law, the defendants will have to defend themselves in court.

This week, a gubernatorial candidate filed a defamation lawsuit against a major news outlet and a private citizen. The suit will likely fail, but not before causing headaches for the defendants.
In September, CNN's Andrew Kaczynski reported that North Carolina Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson, currently the Republican nominee for governor, had made several bewildering and offensive comments over the years on the internet forum Nude Africa. According to the CNN report, Robinson—who is African American—yearned for the reinstitution of slavery, called himself "a black Nazi," and detailed his outré sexual practices and appetites.
Robinson denied the reporting and vowed to remain in the gubernatorial race. This week, nearly a month after the article was posted and just three weeks before the general election, Robinson filed a defamation lawsuit against CNN and Louis Love Money, lead singer of the North Carolina–based band Trailer Park Orchestra.
Money was the main source for a September 2024 article in the North Carolina online magazine The Assembly that alleged "Robinson was a frequent customer in the 1990s and early 2000s" of several 24-hour porn shops where Money worked, coming in "as often as five nights a week to watch porn videos in a private booth." Money further claimed to have sold Robinson "hundreds" of bootleg porn videos on the side and said Robinson still owes him $25 for one.
The previous month, Trailer Park Orchestra had released a music video for their song "The Lt. Governor Owes Me Money." Reached for comment about the lawsuit, Money told Reason via social media message, "I hope it gets Trailer Park Orchestra another 10,000 views on YouTube. That's my statement lol."
In the lawsuit, Robinson contends that he was not a customer of the porn shop but instead "worked at Papa John's pizza" nearby and "would occasionally bring over free pizza and socialize" with Money. The lawsuit suggests that the music video, The Assembly article, and the CNN report are all related. "Within weeks of this then-obscure, barely-viewed Music Video being published," it says, Money "was interviewed by a major online publication with links to George Soros" and made "false allegations" about Robinson. "We're not sure where that claim is coming from," Kyle Villemain, cofounder of The Assembly, told public radio station WUNC, saying the publication receives no funding from Soros.
"Sixteen days after the Assembly Article," the lawsuit continues, "CNN piles on with its own impeccably timed and recklessly false hit piece," which it published "despite Lt. Gov. Robinson's explicit denials." (The article was published the day before North Carolina's deadline for removing a candidate from the ballot.) The lawsuit further contends that Robinson's personal information was "previously compromised by multiple data breaches" and that "any person could have purchased and/or used Lt. Gov. Robinson's data to create accounts all over the internet."
The lawsuit claims that CNN and Money caused Robinson "significant damages, including direct damages, damages to his reputation, public disgrace, humiliation, embarrassment, mental anguish, distress, and anxiety." Although he "can never be fully compensated for the damage done by Defendants' lies," it says, he is seeking "an amount to be proven at trial, but no less than fifty million dollars."
Robinson's lawsuit faces challenges, primarily because it is more difficult for public figures to prove defamation than it is for private individuals. To prove defamation, the Supreme Court ruled in the 1964 case New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, public figures must show that a statement was made with "actual malice"—meaning "with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not."
The CNN article explains in detail how Kaczynski found the reported Nude Africa comments. It says he cross-referenced forum posts with publicly available personal and biographical information about Robinson. Such extensive care would not indicate "actual malice." But proving that claim may not be the point of the lawsuit.
"Anyone that does First Amendment law for more than a few weeks [will recognize] the hallmarks of this lawsuit being a joke," North Carolina attorney T. Greg Doucette tells Reason. "From end to end, it reads like a document whose sole job is…providing air cover for his allies. It's not something they're going to win." He says the lawsuit contains "no evidence" that either CNN or Money "acted with reckless disregard for the truth" and instead relies on "hand-waving bullshit."
Doucette says Robinson's lawsuit has all the telltale signs of a SLAPP—a "strategic lawsuit against public participation," intended to bully someone into silence based on constitutionally protected speech. By definition, SLAPP claims are meritless and unlikely to survive a motion to dismiss. But going through the process can still be prohibitively or ruinously expensive.
"If you're a defense attorney defending this type of case, you're billing by the hour," Doucette says. "That tends to run up the bill pretty quickly because plaintiffs will bury you under dozens of frivolous requests, knowing that it's going to make things expensive, and hope that increases the likelihood that you're going to settle to make it go away."
SLAPPs are often deployed by companies or politicians against private individuals or news outlets as retaliation for embarrassing or inconvenient speech. Many states have adopted anti-SLAPP laws, which allow defendants to block meritless lawsuits. In some cases, a plaintiff filing a dismissed SLAPP can even be forced to reimburse the defendant's attorney fees. But one state that notably lacks an anti-SLAPP statute of any kind is North Carolina—meaning state residents have no mechanism by which to defeat meritless lawsuits punishing them for their protected speech without mounting a full (and expensive) defense.
True or not, the allegations against Robinson certainly have hurt his political career. In the wake of the CNN article, most of his campaign staff quit, as did half of his staff in the lieutenant governor's office. In recent polls, he trails his Democratic opponent by seven to 12 points.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Kamala’s husband may oppose anti-SLAPP law too.
Can someone remind me what Reason’s stance was on Dominion v Fox? I honestly don’t remember.
The public figure doctrine should have been enough to throw the suit out at the trial court level.
Or the Alex Jones case
CNN ows him 10 billion
How messed up do you have to be to actually create an account and post comments on a porn site? Come on... pull yourself together man.
I fail to understand how anyone can take umbrage at Robinson's desire to identify as anything he wants.
he was an avowed public transphobe with an HD full of tranny porn. funny how often that happens, huh??
He had to download the tranny porn to find out what's in the tranny porn.
CNN is not an unbiased media outlet. The media in this country has no qualms about framing certain images or facts for partisan purposes.
So if one of the standards is acting with "reckless disregard of whether it was false or not," CNN might have reason to sweat.
Bias or Not, the general principle of Freedom of the Press is that the State should stay completely out of the matter, and the only regulation needed is a Free Market.
If you don't approve on how outlets like CNN present the news, you are also free Not to subscribe, buy their papers, or even listen
This is a civil lawsuit, not a state mandate.
Ask CNN how frivolous Mr. Sandman's suit was. That one cost them plenty.
Soave was skeptical about the Covington Lawsuits
https://reason.com/2019/02/21/nick-sandmann-covington-lawsuit-libel/
And based on so many articles, Reason’s writers are skeptical about Defamation Laws in General. And if we look at the broader Libertarian Philosophy, Murray Rothbard did argue that people Don’t have a Property Right to their Reputation, it being more of a Privilege that the Individual is Responsible for, and thinking about it more, it’s really hard to argue against
No matter what the truth is, Joe Lancaster knows less about it than the band and the candidate and should Just Butt Out.
He's hardly a private citizen if he injects himself into a political race.
How do you, Joe Lancaster, know the suit will likely fail? What insider knowledge do you have? Have you considered the headaches caused for the candidate? Have you considered the band leader's avowed hope of getting more YouTube views for posting his song?
Joe Lancaster, you're injecting yourself into this matter. You think the band leader was in the right when he injected himself into the matter. Is not the candidate in the right for injecting himself into the matter?
Three loons, seems to me. All with their own agendas, all claiming to be private citizens who have the right to raise a public hue and cry while remaining private citizens.
What I find appalling is that you went this entire article castigating Robinson and wishing that his suit would not only be dismissed but he would be heavily punished for filing it.
And yet not once did you address the question about whether the statements were false. Nothing else matters unless it's false. And you barely touched on the accusation.
After all, his entertainment preferences aside, the claim that he's a Nazi and wanted to reinstitute slavery seems on its face ludicrous. To the point that I would think it parody. And not a serious satire either. It sounds like a comedy sketch.
To take such an absurd accusation at face value based on unsupported hearsay seems to be recklessly disregarding truth at best.
So ... sex workers good, Robinson bad?
What about Mrs. Robinson?
You are very dumb
It's not frivolous if CNN ran a total fake hit piece on him. Being in NC I've listened to him quite a bit and met him yesterday. To think the allegations lobbed his way are true is a real stretch. What would be more likely is someone stole his ID information and got online pretending to be him for who knows what reason.
Since CNN has been denigrating, demonizing and slandering Donald Trump (and many other Republicans) daily since 2016, perhaps Lancaster can explain why he trusts the accuracy of their recent story about Robinson (which was clearly intended to defeat him next month).
The problem with the left wing Trump/GOP hating media propagandists at NYT, WaPo, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, PBS, Politico, etc. is that they've knowingly and intentionally lied so many times (and never acknowledged or apologized for their lies) that nothing they claim should be believed by any objective person (unless substantiated by media outlets that don't suffer from TDS).
Perhaps Lancaster can also explain why Reason published hundreds of Trump hating screeds by Jacob Sullum (demonstrating that Reason Magazine editors also hate Trump).
Because Reason Staff stands by Freedom of the Press, which should be Protected Right even when it's negative. Like how many times did Reason Staff spoke out against Democrat's Misinformation Laws.
He says the lawsuit contains “no evidence” that either CNN or Money “acted with reckless disregard for the truth” and instead relies on “hand-waving bullshit.”
Half-wrong. CNN may have believed Money too readily, but Money made claims about what he himself saw. If it’s untrue, he’s not mistaken, he’s lying, and that certainly meets the Sullivan criteria. The only thing relevant to the suit against him is whether Robinson can prove his claims are untrue.
Of course, Money probably won't be able to pay a judgment, or even his own lawyers. If Robinson was after cash for damages, the only thing that mattered would be whether CNN was _recklessly_ mistaken. But I think Robinson either wants to prove the claims were untrue or to scare Money and CNN into disavowing the truth.