A US jury found on Tuesday that "The New York Times" did not libel former Alaska Governor and vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin in a 2017 editorial she claimed damaged her reputation, the newspaper reported.

The editorial linked a 2011 shooting in Arizona that killed six people and wounded Rep. Gabby Giffords to an advertisement run by Palin’s political action committee. The ad, which ran shortly before the attack, showed Giffords' congressional district in the crosshairs of a firearm.

"The New York Times" corrected the editorial the following day, clarifying that there was no evidence to demonstrate the shooter had been influenced by the controversial ad.

In 2022, a New York jury ruled in favor of the newspaper, following a decision by the presiding judge to dismiss the lawsuit. That ruling became a significant test case for freedom of speech.

However, last August, the US Court of Appeals overturned the decision to dismiss the case and ordered a new trial.

The jury deliberated for two hours before rejecting Palin's defamation claim, as reported by "The New York Times."

“We want to thank the jurors for their careful deliberations. The decision reaffirms an important tenet of American law: publishers are not liable for honest mistakes,” a spokeswoman for "The New York Times" said in a statement.

In the US, the bar to prove defamation is high due to a landmark 1964 Supreme Court ruling that protects journalists from liability for unintentional errors.

Palin, who was the Republican vice-presidential candidate in 2008 alongside John McCain, wrote on X (formerly Twitter) after the jury verdict: “We didn’t prevail in federal court against 'The New York Times,' but please keep fighting for integrity in media. I’ll keep asking the press to quit making things up.”