The Nicholas Sandmann settlement story is really three settlements and five losses. The former Covington Catholic High School student reached confidential agreements with CNN, The Washington Post, and NBC Universal, none of which has ever disclosed a dollar figure. His five other defamation suits, against The New York Times, CBS News, ABC News, Rolling Stone, and Gannett, were dismissed by a federal judge, upheld on appeal, and left standing when the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the case in March 2024.1Supreme Court of the United States. Docket 23-822, Sandmann v. New York Times Co.
Which Media Outlets Settled With Sandmann
Three networks and newspapers settled before trial. Each case ended without a court judgment, and each set of terms was kept confidential.
CNN was first. On January 7, 2020, a CNN spokesperson confirmed the network had settled during a hearing at the federal courthouse in Covington, Kentucky. Sandmann’s original complaint, filed in March 2019, had sought $275 million. Attorney Lin Wood said the deal let CNN “avoid a lengthy and potentially unpredictable trial.”2CNN. CNN Settles Lawsuit With Covington Catholic Student3FOX19. CNN Settles Lawsuit With Nick Sandmann
The Washington Post settled next, in July 2020. Sandmann had sued the Post in February 2019 for $250 million.4ABC7 News. Covington Catholic Student Sues Washington Post for $250M Post spokesperson Kris Coratti said the parties had “reached a mutually agreeable resolution.” Sandmann’s attorney Todd McMurtry said his client agreed to settle because the Post “was quick to publish the whole truth — through its follow-up coverage and editor’s notes.”5CNN. Washington Post Sandmann Settlement Lawsuit
NBC Universal was the last of the three, on December 17, 2021. Sandmann’s suit against NBC had also sought $275 million.6New York Post. Covington Catholic Graduate Nicholas Sandmann Settlement With NBC Court documents filed in Kentucky federal court showed both sides agreed to dismiss the case without a court judgment. Financial terms were again confidential.7Denver Gazette. Nicholas Sandmann Reaches Settlement With NBC
How Much Money Did Sandmann Actually Receive
No one outside the parties and their lawyers knows. The combined damages sought across the three settled cases came to roughly $800 million, but that number reflects only what Sandmann demanded in his complaints, not what he received. Each settlement was confidential, and reporting at the time noted it was “unknown if Sandmann received any money as part of either settlement.”8Cincinnati Enquirer. Washington Post, Nick Sandmann Settle $250 Million Lawsuit Out of Court
Speculative figures have circulated online. None has been confirmed by the parties or by court filings. If you see a specific dollar amount attributed to the CNN, Washington Post, or NBC settlement, treat it as unverified.
The Five Lawsuits Sandmann Lost
In March 2020, Sandmann filed a second wave of suits against five more outlets: The New York Times ($65 million), CBS News ($60 million), ABC News, Rolling Stone, and Gannett, which publishes USA Today and the Cincinnati Enquirer.9Spectrum News 1. Covington Catholic Nicholas Sandmann Defamation Suit Dismissed All eight cases were heard by U.S. District Judge William O. Bertelsman in the Eastern District of Kentucky.10United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Sandmann v. New York Times Co., 78 F.4th 319
On July 26, 2022, Judge Bertelsman granted the defendants’ joint motion for summary judgment and dismissed all five cases. His ruling turned on a single legal question: whether the statements Sandmann had sued over were assertions of fact or expressions of opinion. The core allegation across every suit was that the outlets had defamed Sandmann by publishing or amplifying Nathan Phillips’s claims that Sandmann had “blocked” him and would not let him “retreat” during their encounter at the Lincoln Memorial on January 18, 2019.
Bertelsman found those statements were “objectively unverifiable and therefore unactionable opinion.” Because there was no conversation between Sandmann and Phillips, the judge reasoned, a reasonable reader would understand Phillips was conveying his personal interpretation of the situation rather than asserting an objective fact.10United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Sandmann v. New York Times Co., 78 F.4th 319
The Appeal and the Supreme Court
Sandmann appealed. On August 16, 2023, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal in a published opinion. The majority held that even where video evidence existed, Phillips’s characterization of the encounter remained a subjective reading of another person’s intent, something that “cannot be objectively verified.” The court also noted that the reports in question had included multiple perspectives, putting readers “on notice” that the claims reflected Phillips’s personal point of view.11Daily Journal. Sixth Circuit’s Sandmann Ruling Blurs the Distinction Between Fact and Opinion
Judge Griffin wrote an 18-page dissent. He argued the majority ignored the “plain meaning” of Phillips’s statements and set aside video that “conclusively demonstrates that Phillips’s narrative is indeed blatantly and demonstrably false.” Griffin also pointed out that Phillips never used qualifying language such as “I felt” or “I think.”11Daily Journal. Sixth Circuit’s Sandmann Ruling Blurs the Distinction Between Fact and Opinion
The Sixth Circuit denied rehearing en banc on October 31, 2023. Sandmann petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for certiorari on January 26, 2024. The Court denied the petition on March 25, 2024, without comment.1Supreme Court of the United States. Docket 23-822, Sandmann v. New York Times Co.12Law & Crime. SCOTUS Refuses to Take Up Nick Sandmann’s Libel Case Against NYT, ABC, and CBS That denial closed out every defamation claim Sandmann had brought.
What the Suits Were About
The lawsuits grew out of a single afternoon. Sandmann, then sixteen, and roughly 100 classmates from Covington Catholic High School in northern Kentucky were in Washington, D.C., for the March for Life on January 18, 2019. While the students waited for buses on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, they crossed paths with participants in the Indigenous Peoples March and a small group of Black Hebrew Israelites who were shouting insults at passersby.10United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Sandmann v. New York Times Co., 78 F.4th 319
Nathan Phillips, an Omaha Tribe member and activist, walked toward the students while drumming and singing. Sandmann, wearing a “Make America Great Again” hat, ended up standing face-to-face with Phillips. A short clip went viral and was widely read as the students confronting Phillips. Longer footage that surfaced later showed the Black Hebrew Israelites’ provocations and Phillips approaching the students rather than the other way around.13Time. Covington Catholic, Nathan Phillips, Social Media Division Sandmann said his smile was meant to show he would not be provoked.14NPR. Differing Narratives After Standoff Between Native American Man, High School Students
Sandmann’s family retained attorneys L. Lin Wood and Todd McMurtry and eventually filed suit against eight major news organizations. His legal team argued the outlets had presented Phillips’s version as fact rather than opinion, and had painted Sandmann as the aggressor.15Lexington Herald-Leader. Sandmann Family Retains Attorneys
Why the Fact-Versus-Opinion Question Decided Everything
The courts never reached the questions most people associate with defamation, such as whether the reporting was negligent or made with actual malice. Both the district court and the Sixth Circuit stopped at a threshold issue: whether Phillips’s statements were the kind of claim that can be proven true or false in the first place. Because the courts concluded they were not, the suits could not proceed regardless of what any outlet knew or should have known.
The Sixth Circuit’s opinion leaned on Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co., which protects statements that “cannot reasonably be interpreted as stating actual facts about an individual.” The panel also stressed that when reporting presents “dueling accounts” and attributes a claim to a specific person’s first-person perspective, readers are on notice that the meaning of the event is disputed.10United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Sandmann v. New York Times Co., 78 F.4th 319 That combination, opinion plus attribution plus context, is what the five surviving defendants had in their favor and what the three that settled apparently chose not to test at trial.