Judge loses fight to block critical Charlotte TV story days before election
WBTV can continue publishing stories about Judge Aretha Blake after the Mecklenburg County judge was denied a court order Wednesday to stop the Charlotte TV station from presenting critical information about her record.
Blake says the station’s reporting in past and planned stories about her is untrue and especially damaging close to the election. She has sued WBTV and reporter Nick Ochsner for libel and slander in connection with a Feb. 6 story alleging that Blake mishandled dozens of cases in Family Court.
According to Ochsner’s report, Blake had 52 cases from 2017 that she had not ruled upon. Ochsner planned to air a second story Thursday in which he says the backlog is 35 cases, not 52, Blake’s lawsuit alleges.
Blake and her attorneys have said both figures are untrue, that the backlog did not exist, and that Ochsner knew that and published his story anyway. Blake’s attorneys had asked for a temporary restraining order to block what they described as the “ongoing and continuous defamation” of the judge.
Superior Court Judge Daniel Kuehnert declined. He said that Blake and her attorneys during the two-day hearing had not proven malfeasance on Ochsner’s part, which could legally offset his First Amendment protections.
But Kuehnert’s final words were directed at the station and its reporter.
“I would just encourage caution and communication,” Kuehnert said. “Because if these allegations are not true then there is an injustice being done to this judge and our system.”
The court fight is the latest explosive twist in what would normally be a routine, down-ballot choice Tuesday between Blake, and Charlotte attorney Lynna Moen for one of the county’s 21 district judge seats. Blake is seeking a second term.
At issue is Blake’s first two years on the bench, which she spent in Family Court, and whether she had a problem making timely decisions in the hundreds of divorce, custody and alimony disputes that came into her courtroom.
One of her attorneys, Walter Bowers of Charlotte, accused Ochsner in court Wednesday of not understanding family law or misinterpreting Blake’s case files. “But they went ahead (with the story) anyway. Mr. Ochsner did not get it right,” he said.
Acknowledging the freedom of press protections in the Constitution, Bowers asked Kuehnert to craft a “narrow” temporary restraining order to block WBTV — the Observer’s news partner — from doing more damage to Blake’s reputation and re-election chances while also protecting “free and fair elections” based on facts.
Ochsner’s attorney, Jon Buchan, said such an order would be appropriate only if it had been proven in court that Ochsner’s story was wrong, he said.
“Free speech,” according to Buchan, “makes for hard things for public officials and candidates.”
But Blake’s record as a judge also is an issue of significant public importance, said Buchan, who often represents the Observer.
“To ban people from talking about it is absolutely the wrong message,” he said. “It’s not pretty, and free speech is hard on others. But that’s what our First Amendment stands for.”
After the hearing, defense attorney Lakia Vinson of Charlotte, said Blake “will stand by her truth” — that Ochsner’s story was wrong and that journalists have a responsibility to verify information “before disseminating it.”
She declined to comment on the next steps of Blake’s lawsuit.
WBTV news director Kim Saxon also declined comment after the ruling, nor would she discuss the timing of Ochsner’s next story about Blake.
This story was originally published February 26, 2020 at 6:52 PM with the headline "Judge loses fight to block critical Charlotte TV story days before election ."
