A U.S. appeals court has ruled in favor of James O'Keefe and Project Veritas. The court overturned $130,000 in damages previously awarded against them. This award stemmed from an undercover operation targeting Democratic strategists. The central issue was whether the damages punished the defendants for publishing a news story, which the appeals court majority found to be a First Amendment violation. Project Veritas released a video containing secretly recorded conversations from an undercover intern. The strategist, Robert Creamer, claimed two groups canceled contracts due to this footage. However, the court majority stated that other footage, recorded in public, was primarily responsible for the lost contracts. This public footage is protected speech under the First Amendment. The First Amendment required Creamer to prove unlawful conduct, not protected speech, caused his damages. The majority found the protected content of the video was the leading cause of Creamer's lost contracts. The appeals court also threw out jury findings that the Project Veritas reporter violated wiretapping laws. The majority found no evidence the reporter breached a fiduciary duty to the firm. Consequently, all damages were set aside, with O'Keefe expressing restored faith in journalism and the courts.