THE WEEKLY REVEAL

Hello! In this issue:

• When politics and pardons mix.

• An update on Planet Aid’s libel lawsuit against us – and what’s next after the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals hearing.

• Why the United States is an unlikely option for Gotabaya Rajapaksa, the now-former president of Sri Lanka who fled the country this week.

• A number to remember on how mental health crises are handled among migrant children in shelters.

THIS WEEK’S EPISODE

All the President’s Pardons

We’ve learned from witness testimony during the Jan. 6 committee hearings that members of former President Donald Trump’s inner circle – including six Republican members of Congress and former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows – asked for pardons to shield themselves from prosecution for their participation in trying to overturn the 2020 election. This was before they were even charged with a crime.

Trump’s allies probably thought they stood a good chance of getting pardoned because of the way the former president used his power during his years in office. But what about the people who applied for pardons through the official process and are still waiting for answers?

This week on Reveal, we go beyond the headlines and tell the story of a pardons system that’s backlogged and broken.

This is an update of an episode that originally aired July 6, 2019.

INSIDE THE NEWSROOM

Update on Planet Aid Lawsuit and Hearing

Planet Aid’s used clothing donation boxes can be found in parking lots across the United States. Credit: Amy Walters/Reveal

You may remember that last month, we told you our legal team would be defending us in front of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals against the frivolous libel lawsuit filed by Planet Aid in response to our truthful reporting about its corrupt practices.

Attorney Tom Burke from Davis Wright Tremaine powerfully argued in our favor the two points necessary for a libel case: 1. Are Planet Aid and its director Liz Thomsen public figures, and therefore subject to a higher standard for libel, in accordance with the First Amendment? 2. If they were public officials, was there a showing of actual malice – that the reporters recklessly disregarded the truth?

Burke expertly navigated the argument before the three-judge panel.

This case matters for more than just our newsroom. If the court chooses in favor of Planet Aid, it will disturb the longstanding First Amendment principle set out by the Supreme Court in New York Times v. Sullivan that requires parties show more to prove libel when discussing matters of public importance. By finding that we libeled Planet Aid, the 9th Circuit could disturb the sacrosanct “breathing space” created by the court necessary for individuals to criticize public figures and officials. Without it, truth and investigative reporting may easily be stymied.

But as with many cases, it is simply hard to read the tea leaves, so now we wait and see how the 9th Circuit rules. We hope to hear a final verdict within the next year. We will keep you updated.

— Victoria Baranetsky
General Counsel

FEATURED STORIES

Abortion Providers Ask for Protection as They Prepare for Post-Roe Harassment and Violence
By Laura C. Morel

As a wave of bans on the procedure takes effect across the U.S., providers and patients will face mounting risks in places where clinics remain open. Read the full story.

Police Know Arrests Won’t Fix Homelessness. They Keep Making Them Anyway.
By Melissa Lewis

As unhoused people increasingly live in residential neighborhoods, their new neighbors have turned to one place for help in particular: the police. Read the full story.

In the News

Gotabaya Rajapaksa (center), then Sri Lanka’s defense minister, stands with his commanders and special forces in 2010. Credit: Reuters/Alamy

Gotabaya Rajapaksa resigns as president of Sri Lanka after fleeing the country. Rajapaksa’s resignation comes after months of protests in the country over its crippling economic crisis. His departure also disrupts the decades-long political influence the Rajapaksa family had in Sri Lanka. The former president’s brother, Mahinda, had previously served as both president and prime minister, and another brother, Basil, as finance minister. Also, “cousins and assorted relatives have populated various parts of the Sri Lankan political hierarchy – from the ministry for economic development to the irrigation department to senior positions in Parliament and other public institutions,” Grid News writes.

For now, Rajapaksa and his wife are in Singapore, where the government has confirmed that they have not sought asylum, according to The Guardian. His final destination remains unknown.

What we do know is that the United States, Rajapaksa’s former home, is an unlikely option due to his role in Sri Lanka’s civil war, during which as defense minister he oversaw a scorched-earth campaign to end the war. It included bombing Tamil civilians inside a safe zone, shelling hospitals, killing surrendered fighters, illegally arresting and torturing civilians, and violently trying to silence a free press. Rajapaksa is also accused of ordering the killing of one of the most prominent and critical journalists in the country, Lasantha Wickrematunge, in 2009.

The U.S. government knew about these allegations for years and still allowed Rajapaksa, who was previously a naturalized U.S. citizen, to travel freely between the U.S. and Sri Lanka. (As an American citizen, he was subject to U.S. laws, including the criminal statutes that address human rights violations.)

In 2019, fed up with government inaction, two nongovernmental organizations filed separate lawsuits in California accusing Rajapaksa of the torture of a Tamil man and the killing of Wickrematunge. He was served papers for one of those lawsuits in the parking lot of a Trader Joe’s in Southern California that same year.

We examined Rajapaksa’s story as part of our investigation into the suspected war criminals and human rights abusers the U.S. government has failed to charge while they were on U.S. soil. Listen to the episode on Reveal.

A Number to Remember

In President Joe Biden’s first three months in office, Reveal found nearly 600 episodes in which migrant children in the government’s custody said they’d considered or attempted suicide, either before or since arriving in the United States.

We first sought reports in 2019 related to suicidal episodes among children in shelters and sued the federal government in 2020 after it failed to deliver the records. Through settlement negotiations, we ultimately obtained full narratives about suicidal episodes among migrant children from late January to late April 2021.

The data we obtained is the best window available into how mental health crises are handled in a patchwork system that’s sometimes ill-equipped to tackle serious episodes, leaving migrant children to bear the tremendous toll.