After ethics settlement, KY Rep. Grossberg threatens to sue opponent for defamation
AI-generated summary reviewed by our newsroom.
- Rep. Daniel Grossberg threatens defamation suit over challenger's critical statements.
- Max Morley won't retract; attorney cites truth, public‑figure law, anti‑SLAPP protections.
- Ethics settlement: reprimand and $2,000 fine tied to intimidation and related conduct.
State Rep. Daniel Grossberg of Louisville is threatening to sue one of his May 19 Democratic primary challengers for defamation because of how the challenger describes Grossberg’s public controversies involving women over the last two years, including a recent settlement with the Legislative Ethics Commission.
Grossberg sent a March 10 cease-and-desist letter to candidate Max Morley demanding retractions and public corrections of statements that Morley posted to social media which Grossberg says are false. In the letter, Grossberg requested Morley make these retractions and corrections within 72 hours and asked for no further defamation.
“Our current state representative, Daniel Grossberg, has been dragged before the Ethics Commission for sexual harassment, abusing his position and financial quid-pro-quo. Today he filed for re-election,” Morley wrote on his campaign’s Facebook page on Jan. 6, one of several such posts.
In his response on Monday, an attorney for Morley said he would not retract any of his criticism of Grossberg on social media or stop speaking about the legislator while he campaigns door-to-door.
“Mr. Morley’s statements are not actionable because they are true,” attorney Rick Adams wrote for Morley in a response letter on Monday to Grossberg’s lawyer, former state Sen. Adrienne Southworth.
“Mr. Grossberg has sexually harassed several young women,” Adams wrote. “Only some of those incidents were at issue in the Legislative Ethics Commission proceedings; a lawsuit will not be so limited. As you note in your letter, truth is a complete defense to defamation. Any lawsuit initiated by your client will be quickly dismissed on that basis.”
Morley is one of three Democrats challenging Grossberg’s re-election to House District 30, along with Cassie Lyles and Mitra Subedi. There is no Republican candidate.
The Herald-Leader began reporting in 2024 on allegations of sexual harassment against Grossberg based on interviews with six women in and around Kentucky politics.
Last month, Grossberg reached a settlement with the Legislative Ethics Commission involving a reprimand and $2,000 in fines for the intimidation of a Louisville strip club that banned him for life after he allegedly groped a dancer and his 2023 conduct toward Emma Curtis, now a Lexington city councilwoman, who says the behavior was sexual harassment.
In her letter last week, Southworth criticized Morley for comments he allegedly made about Grossberg on his campaign’s social media accounts and as he knocked on doors around the House district.
Morley has used defamatory terms like “sexual assault” and “financial corruption,” which are not facts established in the ethics commission proceedings, Southworth wrote.
“You may attempt to invoke First Amendment protections by characterizing your statements as political opinion or rhetorical commentary,” Southworth wrote. “That defense fails here. Under Kentucky law, a pure opinion is protected only where the commentator states the underlying facts on which the opinion is based, and those underlying facts are not provably false.”
In his response Monday, Adams told Southworth that Grossberg is a public figure, which generally means he has less legal protection from defamation and must prove actual malice by a defendant in order to prevail in any lawsuit.
Kentucky also has laws that punish SLAPP — Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation — to prevent people from suing for the sole purpose of silencing their critics, Adams said.
“Mr. Grossberg is not the first politician to threaten a political opponent with a lawsuit,” Adams wrote “It is a troubling trend in America’s and Kentucky’s political culture. Fortunately, Kentucky courts have had little difficulty applying fundamental principles of American law to dismiss these lawsuits out of hand.”
