The Arab American News publisher alleges late-campaign messages distorted his remarks, falsely linked him to terrorism and misrepresented financial support for Abdul El-Sayed

DEARBORN — Osama Siblani, founder and publisher of The Arab American News, announced Thursday morning that he has filed a defamation lawsuit against former Republican U.S. Senate candidate Mike Rogers, his campaign, Together for Michigan, Karen Whitsett and other parties over statements circulated during the closing days of Michigan’s November 3 election.

The announcement came through a video released November 12 to the media and the community at large, featuring statements from Siblani and his attorney, James P. Allen, Sr.

The complaint, submitted to the Wayne County Circuit Court, alleges defamation and defamation by implication arising from political advertising and social media communications that Siblani says falsely portrayed him as hostile to Jewish Americans, supportive of terrorism and responsible for hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions to Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed. Court confirmation assigning a case number was pending at the time of the announcement.

“These were not innocent mistakes or legitimate political disagreements,” Siblani said. “I believe they were calculated falsehoods designed to manipulate voters, influence an election and destroy my reputation in the process.”

The lawsuit seeks a jury trial, compensatory damages and exemplary damages where permitted under Michigan law. It does not specify a dollar amount, asking that compensatory damages be determined by a jury.

Dispute over the “Poland” remark

A central allegation concerns a post that the complaint says Rogers published on or about October 27 through the X account @MikeRogersForMI.

According to the complaint, the post stated, “Siblani told Jewish Americans they should go back to Poland.”

Siblani denies making that statement. The complaint says his underlying remark was directed specifically at Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, rather than Jewish Americans as a religious or ethnic group.

The lawsuit argues that substituting Jewish Americans for Netanyahu fundamentally changed the meaning of the remark and falsely suggested that Siblani advocated their exclusion or removal because of their identity.

“They falsely claimed that I demanded Jewish Americans return to Poland,” Siblani said in the video. “I NEVER SAID THAT.”

The complaint maintains that the original recording and surrounding context establish whom Siblani was addressing. It alleges that Rogers knew the published attribution was false or entertained serious doubts about its accuracy.

The lawsuit also challenges the post’s use of the description “Hamas-Loving Editor”, which it says appeared both in a Washington Free Beacon headline reproduced in the post and in a label attached to Siblani’s photograph. Siblani alleges that the presentation falsely conveyed that he endorsed the organization’s actions.

The Washington Free Beacon is referenced in the complaint but is not listed among its named defendants.

Allegations about the October 7 attack and terrorism

A second set of allegations concerns political advertising attributed to Together for Michigan, also identified in the complaint as TFM.

The complaint says the advertising asserted that Siblani “justified the attacks of October 7th” and “defends terrorists.” Siblani denies both allegations.

The lawsuit distinguishes his political commentary about Israel, Palestine and armed conflict from endorsing attacks against civilians. It contends that the advertisements attributed specific positions to him that he did not express and that could be checked against original recordings, transcripts and their context.

“They falsely portrayed me as someone who justified the October 7 attacks and supported terrorism,” Siblani said. “THAT IS A LIE.”

According to the complaint, Siblani has condemned terrorism and violence against civilian noncombatants. It alleges that the challenged advertising materially misrepresented those positions.

Allen, in his separate statement, said those responsible had crossed the line between political criticism and fabricated factual accusations.

“They took statements out of context, attributed words to him that he never uttered and portrayed a respected journalist and civil rights advocate as a supporter of terrorism,” Allen said. “That’s not political debate. That’s character assassination.”

He also criticized what he described as the exploitation of civilian suffering for political purposes.

“And there is something particularly reprehensible about exploiting the tragedy of October 7 and the suffering of innocent people to manufacture a political attack against an Arab American journalist,” Allen said.

They tried to use lies as political weapons. Today, I am using the law to fight back.
— Osama Siblani

Claims about financial support for Senator-elect Abdul El-Sayed

The complaint also disputes statements concerning hundreds of thousands of dollars in financial support for El-Sayed.

It alleges that political messaging falsely portrayed Siblani as personally providing that money or directing a group to provide it. The lawsuit challenges both the personal contribution allegation and the implication that he exercised unilateral control over an organization’s political spending.

“They falsely claimed that I personally contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to Abdul El-Sayed’s Senate campaign,” Siblani said. “THAT IS ALSO A LIE.”

The complaint distinguishes personal campaign contributions from fundraising assistance, contributions by unrelated individuals and independent political expenditures. It argues that financial activity attributable to other people or organizations cannot establish that Siblani personally contributed those amounts.

The lawsuit also says the organization referenced in the challenged messaging makes decisions democratically, does not always follow Siblani’s preferences and is not subject to his unilateral direction.

It alleges that those responsible knowingly conflated distinct categories of political activity or published the accusations despite serious doubts about their accuracy.

Mike Rogers’ tweet on X (formerly Twitter) repeating the Washington Free Beacon’s lies.
– Screenshot

Political speech and the burden of proof

Both the complaint and Allen’s statement acknowledge the broad constitutional protections afforded political debate.

“The First Amendment protects political speech,” Allen said. “It protects vigorous debate. It even protects speech that is offensive, outrageous and deeply unpopular.

“What it does not protect is the knowing and malicious fabrication of facts about another human being,” he continued. “And that is precisely what we allege happened here.”

The complaint acknowledges Siblani’s longstanding participation in public controversies involving American foreign policy and the Middle East. For purposes of the pleading, it assumes that the constitutional “actual malice” standard applies to the challenged statements.

As described in the complaint, that standard requires establishing that a responsible defendant published a false factual assertion knowing it was false or with subjective reckless disregard for its truth.

The lawsuit expressly acknowledges that political hostility, ordinary negligence or a failure to investigate, standing alone, does not necessarily establish actual malice.

Instead, it alleges deliberate distortion of source material, omission of context essential to its meaning and publication despite knowledge of falsity or serious doubts about accuracy. It says the evidence must establish the responsibility and state of mind of each defendant separately.

The defamation-by-implication count addresses the overall presentation of the challenged messages. It alleges that the selection, editing and juxtaposition of statements, images and narration conveyed false factual impressions about Siblani, beyond individual disputed phrases.

Allen pledges investigation into those responsible

Along with Rogers, his campaign, TFM and Whitsett, the complaint names 20 unidentified “John Doe” defendants.

Those defendants could include political consultants, advertising producers, media buyers and others whose roles in creating, approving or disseminating the challenged communications would be established through discovery.

Whitsett is named as a defendant, although the complaint does not separately detail a specific statement or publication attributed to her.

Allen said the legal process would be used to determine how the attacks were developed and distributed.

“We intend to use every lawful means of discovery to determine who conceived this attack, who financed it, who approved it and who knowingly participated in disseminating these falsehoods,” he said. “And we intend to hold those responsible accountable in a court of law.”

The complaint identifies several areas for discovery, including original recordings, editing decisions, communications about accuracy, campaign approval procedures, advertising placements, audience targeting and republication.

It also alleges that the defendants were given an opportunity to retract the challenged statements before the action and declined to do so.

The allegations remain to be adjudicated. Statements from the defendants addressing the lawsuit were not available in the materials accompanying the announcement.

Political campaigns may end on Election Day. Accountability does not.
— James P. Allen, Sr.

Siblani says his reputation is worth defending

The lawsuit alleges that the challenged statements damaged Siblani’s professional reputation and community standing and caused humiliation, emotional distress and other injuries to be established through discovery and trial.

Siblani said the attacks struck at the credibility he has built through decades of publishing and public service.

“For more than 42 years, as the founder and publisher of The Arab American News, I have devoted my life to journalism, public service, defending civil rights and fighting discrimination and injustice,” he said.

“My reputation was not built overnight, and I will not allow desperate political operatives to destroy it with fabricated accusations and malicious propaganda.”

He said he intends to pursue the case vigorously and seek accountability from everyone shown to be responsible.

“This lawsuit is not about silencing political opponents. It is about accountability,” Siblani said. “It is about protecting the integrity of our elections, defending the truth and sending a powerful message that no candidate, political organization or individual has the right to deliberately destroy another person’s reputation for political gain.”

Allen said the conclusion of the election does not erase the alleged damage.

“But the damage they inflicted doesn’t disappear when the polls close,” he said. “Neither does their responsibility for it.”

Siblani closed his statement with a pledge to challenge the accusations in court.

“I will not be intimidated,” he said. “I will not be silenced. And I will not allow these attacks to go unanswered.

“My reputation is not for sale,” he added. “My integrity is not negotiable. And the truth is worth fighting for.”