Hasan Piker Sues Scott Jennings for Defamation Over Edited Video
publishers 15articles 15first reported 27 Oct, 23:12 UTCdeveloping since 28 Oct · 4 editions
Political streamer Hasan Piker filed a defamation lawsuit against conservative commentator Scott Jennings on Tuesday, seeking at least $72.5 million in damages over claims that Piker advocated lynching Black Americans.
The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, centers on an Aug. 11 episode of “The Scott Jennings Show” and subsequent social media posts. Piker alleges Jennings aired a manipulated 42-second video and falsely said Piker had a “plan of returning our country to lynchings” and believed the United States should resume lynchings of Black people.
According to the lawsuit, the footage originated with a 2024 Twitch broadcast in which Piker sarcastically mocked another commentator’s argument about “woke” district attorneys. The complaint says the edited clip removed the words “He said,” omitted surrounding context and rearranged portions of multiple broadcasts, making Piker’s ridicule appear to represent his own views. It also alleges Jennings attributed to Piker a quotation he never made.
Piker is pursuing claims of defamation per se, defamation by implication and false light. He seeks at least $27.5 million in compensatory damages and $45 million in punitive damages. The complaint also says Jennings ignored an August retraction demand and left the disputed content online.
Bloomberg Law reported that Jennings did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
HOW THIS STORY WAS MADE
Written from 4 articles, 3 with the publisher's own text; 4 independent newsrooms once syndicated copies count as one; this version written 18 h after the record first saw the story; the editor kept it as written.
- Publishers
- 15
- Source articles
- 15
- Given to the writer
- 4, 3 with the article's own text
- Independent newsrooms
- 4
- This version written
- 18 h after the record first saw the story
- Second model (editor)
- kept as written
- Publication gate
- passed
- Human review
- none
WHAT THE EDITOR DID
The second model checked the writer's draft against the same sources and published it as written.
Written by a language model from the sources above, then checked by a second model that may only cut, attribute or correct. How it works →