Leah Remini’s legal battle with Scientology has entered another dramatic chapter with new arguments presented before a California appeals court. Her attorneys now claim the Church carried out a years-long campaign that went far beyond public criticism and crossed into defamatory harassment.
The latest hearing focused on legal arguments instead of witness testimony. A written ruling has not yet been issued.
The ongoing lawsuit between Leah Remini and Scientology has taken a new turn with allegations of incitement and harassment
According to RadarOnline.com, Remini’s attorney argued before California’s Second District Court of Appeal that the dispute cannot simply be dismissed as a public feud. “This is not a war of words. That’s a false equivalence,” counsel told the three-judge panel.
Her legal team claimed Scientology built an extensive network of websites, blog posts, videos, and online publications that targeted the actress after she criticized the religion through her Emmy-winning docuseries, bestselling memoir, podcast, and other public appearances.
The attorney argued that no individual could realistically match that volume of content. He also claimed the Church continued publishing allegedly defamatory statements even after Remini denied the accusations and filed her lawsuit. According to her counsel, those repeated statements support an inference of actual malice under defamation law.
One major issue involved claims that Remini encouraged violence against Scientologists. Her attorney argued those allegations represent factual assertions, not protected opinions, because courts can determine whether they are true or false.
The appellate judges also questioned whether statements framed as questions could still imply factual accusations. Remini’s attorney responded that speakers cannot avoid defamation liability simply by wording allegations as questions if readers could reasonably interpret them as factual claims.
Her legal team also argued that some disputed statements involved her personal life and family relationships. They contended those issues fall outside the public debate surrounding Scientology.
The Church strongly rejected those arguments. Attorney Kevin Rosen argued Remini voluntarily entered the public conversation through years of outspoken criticism. He maintained that many challenged statements qualified as protected opinions or constitutionally protected responses to her comments about Scientology.
The appeal stems from an earlier ruling on Scientology’s anti-SLAPP motion. Both sides have asked the appellate court to review different parts of that decision. After hearing oral arguments, the judges took the matter under submission and will issue a written opinion at a later date.
TELL US – DO YOU THINK LEAH REMINI’S LAWSUIT WILL MOVE FORWARD AFTER THE APPEALS COURT REVIEWS THE CASE?
