Meghan Markle’s Sister Fights to Keep Defamation Case Alive After Judge Pushes Back

After today’s hearing in Jacksonville, Florida, Samantha Markle’s lawyer insisted the court should be more focused on her rights than on protecting the judge. Speaking with Newsweek, attorney Peter Ticktin, who represents Samantha, said, “The Court has a duty to protect Samantha Markle more than it should be worrying about protecting Judge Honeywell. So, what if Judge Honeywell is reversed or affirmed? How can that be more important than whether an injured party is protected by the laws of Florida.”

The long-running case stems from Meghan Markle’s 2021 interview with Oprah Winfrey, when she made remarks Samantha claims were defamatory. In the interview, Meghan said, “I think it’d be very hard to tell all when you don’t know me. And I mean, this is a very different situation than my dad, right? When you talk about betrayal, betrayal comes from someone that you have a relationship with, right?”

“I don’t feel comfortable talking about people that I really don’t know. But I grew up as an only child, which everyone who grew up around me knows.”

Those comments, according to Samantha, damaged her reputation by suggesting she had fabricated or exaggerated their relationship. That is the crux of her legal claim.

But the court doesn’t seem entirely convinced. Chief U.S. Circuit Judge William Pryor, who heard arguments this week, appeared to dismiss much of Samantha’s case.

The Courthouse News Service quoted him as saying, “It seems to me that everything you argue about is beside the point. Because when the district court rules… you have to knock down in your opening brief every basis for the district court’s ruling, and you didn’t even touch this.”

That remark highlights a central problem for Samantha’s legal team. If they cannot convincingly counter the original ruling against them, the case risks being thrown out before it even has a chance to reach trial.

Still, Samantha’s lawyer is trying to keep the focus on her claims and away from the technicalities. Ticktin insists the case is not about judicial procedures but about protecting someone who says she has been harmed. The push is to frame this as an issue of fairness and accountability, even as the judges press on the legal weaknesses.

It’s not the first time the case has faced hurdles. Meghan’s lawyers have long argued that her comments were simply her opinions, and courts in the United States are reluctant to punish people for sharing personal views, especially during high-profile interviews.

The legal bar for defamation is notoriously high, requiring proof that the statements were false, damaging, and made with reckless disregard for the truth.

Samantha’s side believes Meghan crossed that line by implying she fabricated her family ties for fame. Meghan’s team maintains it was nothing more than a personal reflection about her own upbringing.

The outcome remains uncertain, but the tone of the latest hearing suggests Samantha’s battle will be an uphill one. Judges seemed sceptical, and unless her lawyer can convince the panel otherwise, the case may soon be over.