ATLANTIC CITY — In a huge victory for free-speech rights, Hirsh Singh won a historic lawsuit that had been filed against him in 2021 by his political opponent in the 2020 US Senate Primary Rik Mehta in response to Singh describing information about Mehta that had been obtained from various sources in the public domain.
In the landmark judgment that has made proponents of free-speech rights around the country ecstatic, Judge David Ironson ruled that Singh’s statements were “protected statements of opinion,” that “Singh has pointed to the facts upon which he has based his statements,” and that “readers of the statements are able to draw their own conclusions as to whether the opinions are justified.”
The ruling is an extremely important one and is expected to be used by the legal community as an important precedent in the decades to come. The lawsuit had been filed after Singh used information from the Republican Party database that labeled Mehta as a “Hard Democrat” and contrasted it with the database’s description of Singh as a “Hard Republican.” Singh had also used the description in Mehta’s own Resume regarding his role in Pfizer. There were several other points, like Mehta previously being a registered Democrat and Mehta himself describing his work in the Washington, DC Democratic Mayor’s administration as a political appointment, all of which had sources.
Mehta has a law degree, but was represented by Alan Zakin, another attorney, but Singh fought this lawsuit Pro Se. Singh’s victory was thus against two lawyers although Singh does not have a law degree. Had Mehta prevailed in this case, it would have put an end to free-speech in this country as we know it. “This lawsuit was completely frivolous and a political hit job. It was an assault on one of the most important rights guaranteed by our Constitution,” said Hirsh Singh.
Republican Candidate for President