New York
Robert S. Rifkind, Who Defended a Libel Suit by Ariel Sharon, Dies at 88
Robert S. Rifkind, who played a pivotal role in successfully defending Time magazine against a $50 million libel suit filed by Ariel Sharon, the former Israeli general, defense minister and later prime minister, died on March 12 at his home in Manhattan. He was 88.
The cause was complications of myasthenia gravis, a neuromuscular disease, his daughter Amy Rifkind said.
Mr. Sharon’s suit was prompted by a single paragraph in the Feb. 21, 1983, issue of Time. It referred to an Israeli government report on the massacre months earlier by Christian Phalange militiamen of at least 800 and as many as 3,500 civilian refugees, mostly Palestinians, in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Lebanon. The massacre happened after Israel invaded Lebanon and the country’s president-elect, Bashir Gemayel, the Phalange leader, was assassinated.
The article suggested that Mr. Sharon had personally discussed retribution with Mr. Gemayel’s family, and that the Israelis looked the other way when the Phalangists extracted their revenge.
A jury found in 1985 that Time had misrepresented Mr. Sharon’s role in the massacre. But the jury concluded that the magazine’s reporting did not meet the legal threshold for libel in the United States because it did not publish the article with actual malice or a reckless disregard for the facts.
An Israeli commission’s damning conclusions that Israeli forces did not stop the massacre led to Mr. Sharon’s resignation as defense minister. But the commission’s report did not say that Mr. Sharon himself had mentioned revenge to the Gemayel family.
“The case is really not about libel, but a political instrument in the plaintiff’s hands,” Mr. Rifkind, whose law firm, Cravath, Swaine & Moore, represented Time, said while the suit was pending. “A pitched battle in which David, the Israeli war hero, smites Goliath, the American corporate giant, is good political fodder.”
Mr. Sharon, who later became the prime minister of Israel, declared victory, of sorts, because the jury found that Time had acted “negligently and carelessly” in publishing the disputed paragraph. The case cost the magazine millions in legal fees.
“Rifkind was a superb lawyer, who argued many of the motions, and did an admirable job,” U.S. District Court Judge Abraham D. Sofaer, who presided over the case, said this week in an email.
When the lead defense lawyer, Thomas D. Barr, was ill and the Time executive who was monitoring the case was out of the country, and with Mr. Sharon wanting to return to Israel to campaign for office, Mr. Rifkind negotiated a proposed settlement of the lawsuit on the basis of a prepared statement.
“The statement did not include any payment or even an apology,” Judge Sofaer recalled. “It simply said that Time did not intend to convey that Sharon had given permission for the murders. Rifkind had undoubtedly secured a highly favorable result in the case. Sharon was tired of the litigation and gave his political life a higher priority.”
Time, however, confident of a favorable verdict, rejected the proposal. The subsequent finding that the magazine had been negligent — though not malicious — bolstered Mr. Sharon’s case when he sued Time in Israel, where the malice standard did not apply, and won a settlement there.
The case caused a sensation in the United States and the Middle East for its political implications and its impact on the media industry.
Mr. Rifkind figured in several other major cases, including a successful defense of the 1964 Voting Rights Act when he was assistant to the U.S. solicitor general at the time, Thurgood Marshall, a post he held from 1965 to 1968.
Mr. Rifkind argued several cases before the Supreme Court. He was involved in Miranda v. Arizona, the 1966 case that established that police officers must inform suspects of their constitutional rights before questioning. He worked on South Carolina v. Katzenbach, in which the Supreme Court ruled in 1966 that federal intervention to let eligible residents of individual states register and vote was constitutional under the 15th Amendment. (Nicholas Katzenbach was the U.S. attorney general.) And he represented New York City voluntarily, or pro bono, in lawsuits in the 1980s and ’90s challenging the federal decennial census because of what the city said was an undercount.
Mr. Rifkind was also involved in Jewish affairs. He served as president of the American Jewish Committee from 1994 to 1998.
“Bob Rifkind was what all lawyers aspire to be,” said Evan R. Chesler, Cravath’s former presiding partner and chairman. “He was brilliant, had a majestic command of the language and was unfailingly courteous to all those who worked for, with and against him.”
Robert Singer Rifkind was born on Aug. 31, 1936, in Manhattan to Adele (Singer) and Simon H. Rifkind. His father was a federal judge and later a partner in the firm that became known as Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison in 1950, four years after it was founded.
Bob Rifkind graduated from the Loomis School (now the Loomis Chaffee School) in Windsor, Conn., and earned a bachelor’s degree in history from Yale College in 1958 and a juris doctor degree from Harvard University Law School in 1961.
He joined Cravath the next year and, except for his stint with the solicitor general in Washington, remained with the firm until he retired in 2001. He had senior counsel status after retiring as a litigator.
In 1961, he married Arlene Brenner; she died in 2021. In addition to his daughter Amy, he is survived by another daughter, Nina Rifkind, and five grandchildren.
His daughters, both lawyers, invoked their grandfather this week in a letter to Brad Karp, the chairman of Paul, Weiss, in which they publicly criticized the firm’s decision to commit $40 million in pro bono legal services for causes President Trump championed if the White House rescinded an executive order that would have suspended Paul, Weiss’s security clearances and prohibited its lawyers from entering federal buildings.
New York
Essential New York City Movies Picked by Ira Sachs and Blondie’s Debbie Harry and Chris Stein
Film
‘Make Way for Tomorrow’ (1937), directed by Leo McCarey
The log line: After the bank forecloses on their home, an elderly couple must separate, each living with a different one of their adult children.
The pitch: “It’s a film that Orson Welles famously said ‘would make a stone cry,’” says Sachs, 60, about McCarey’s movie, singling out a long sequence at the end that depicts “a date through certain lobbies and bars of New York City that offers a snapshot of Midtown in the ’30s.”
‘The World of Henry Orient’ (1964), directed by George Roy Hill
The log line: A wily 14-year-old girl and her best friend follow a ridiculous concert pianist, on whom they have a crush, around the city.
The pitch: Hill’s 1960s romp inspired Sachs’s film “Little Men” (2016), which is about boys around the same age as these protagonists. “It’s an extraordinarily sweet film that also seems, to me, very honest,” he says.
‘Coming Apart’ (1969), directed by Milton Moses Ginsberg
The log line: Rip Torn plays an obsessive psychiatrist who secretly films all the women passing through his home office, inadvertently capturing his own mental breakdown.
The pitch: Shot in one room with a fixed camera, Ginsberg’s film “really feels of a time,” says Sachs. It’s also “very sexual and very free,” reminding him of what’s possible when it comes to making movies.
‘Deadly Hero’ (1975), directed by Ivan Nagy
The log line: A disturbed, racist cop saves a cellist from a crook, only to become her tormentor.
The pitch: Harry, 80, and Stein, 76, were extras in Nagy’s film, which stars Don Murray, Diahn Williams and James Earl Jones as the cop, the cellist and the crook, respectively. The pair call the movie “[expletive] weird,” but also say that their day rate — $300 — “was the most money we’d ever made on anything” up to that point.
‘News From Home’ (1976), directed by Chantal Akerman
The log line: An experimental documentary by Akerman, a Belgian filmmaker who moved to New York in her early 20s, the film features long takes of the city and voice-over in which the director reads letters from her mother.
The pitch: “I’m intrigued by how beauty contains sadness in the city,” says Sachs. Not only is her film a “beautiful record of the city” but it captures “what it is to be alone here, to have left some sort of community and, in particular for Chantal, separated from her mother.”
‘Wolfen’ (1981), directed by Michael Wadleigh
The log line: Albert Finney stars as a former N.Y.P.D. detective who returns to the job to solve a violent and bizarre string of murders.
The pitch: Wadleigh’s film is not only a vehicle for Finney, says Stein, it also “has a lot of footage from the South Bronx when it was still completely destroyed” by widespread arson in the 1970s.
‘Losing Ground’ (1982), directed by Kathleen Collins
The log line: Collins’s film — the first feature-length drama for a major studio directed by an African American woman — observes a rocky relationship between a college professor and her painter husband.
The pitch: Sachs calls “Losing Ground” “a revelation.” The characters are “so human and fascinating and extremely modern,” he says, adding that he loves a movie that “exists in some very complete version of the local.”
‘After Hours’ (1985), directed by Martin Scorsese
The log line: In Scorsese’s black comedy, an office worker (Griffin Dunne) has a surreal and bizarre evening of misadventure while trying to get back uptown from a woman’s apartment in SoHo.
The pitch: Harry and Stein recommend this zany tale and borderline “nightmare” for the way it captures a bygone era of New York. “It’s this great image of [Lower Manhattan] when it was still raw, you know, Wild West territory,” Stein says.
‘Downtown 81’ (shot in 1980-81, released in 2000), directed by Edo Bertoglio
The log line: Bertoglio’s film is a striking portrait of a young artist who needs to raise money so he can return to the apartment from which he’s been evicted.
The pitch: Jean-Michel Basquiat stars as the artist in this snapshot of life in New York during the ’80s. Despite all the drama surrounding it — postproduction wasn’t completed until 20 years after filming, and for many years the movie was considered lost — the film is notable, says Stein, because “it’s got all the characters and all our buddies in it.”
These interviews have been edited and condensed.
More in Film
See the rest of the issue
Theater
Quincy Tyler Bernstine
A master of active stillness, the 52-year-old Bernstine (imposing in the 2024 revival of John Patrick Shanley’s “Doubt,” above) has that great actorly gift of making thought visible. A natural leader onstage, she compels audiences to follow her.
Victoria Clark
One of the theater’s best singing actors, with Tonys for Adam Guettel and Craig Lucas’s “The Light in the Piazza” (2005) and David Lindsay-Abaire and Jeanine Tesori’s “Kimberly Akimbo” (above, 2022), Clark, 66, performs not on top of the notes but through them, delivering complicated characterization and gorgeous sound in each breath.
Susannah Flood
Flood, 43, is a true expert at confusion, a good thing because she often plays characters like the twisted-in-knots Lizzie in Bess Wohl’s “Liberation” (above, 2025). What makes that confusion thrilling is how she grounds it not in a lack of information or purpose but, just like real life, in an excess of both.
Jonathan Groff
The rare musical theater man with the unstoppable drive of a diva, Groff, 41, sweats charisma, as audience members in ringside seats at Warren Leight and Isaac Oliver’s Broadway musical “Just in Time” (above, 2025) recently discovered. Giving you everything, he makes you want more.
William Jackson Harper
Unmoored characters are often unsympathetic. But whether playing a confused doctor in the 2024 revival of Anton Chekhov’s “Uncle Vanya” or a delusional bookstore clerk in Eboni Booth’s “Primary Trust” (above, 2023), Harper, 46, makes vulnerability look easy, and hurt hard.
Joshua Henry
There are singers who blow the roof off theaters, but the 41-year-old Henry’s voice is so huge and deeply connected to universal feelings that he seems to be singing inside you. Currently starring in the Broadway revival of “Ragtime” (above, by Lynn Ahrens, Stephen Flaherty and Terrence McNally), he blows the roof off your head.
Mia Katigbak
Superb and acidic in almost any role — in distress (Annie Baker’s 2023 “Infinite Life,” above) or in command (2024’s “Uncle Vanya”) — Katigbak, 71, finds the sweet spot in even the sourest truths of the human condition.
Judy Kuhn
With detailed intelligence and specific intention informing everything she sings, Kuhn, 67, is (among other things) a Stephen Sondheim specialist — her take on Fosca in “Passion” (above, 2012) was almost literally wrenching. It requires intellectual stamina to keep up with the master word for word.
Laurie Metcalf
The fierce, sharp persona you may know from her years on “Roseanne” (1988-97) is about a tenth of the blistering commitment Metcalf, 70, offers onstage in works like Samuel D. Hunter’s “Little Bear Ridge Road” (above, 2025). She goes there, no matter the destination.
Deirdre O’Connell
For 40 years an Off Broadway treasure, O’Connell, 72, handles the most daring, out-there material — including, recently, a 12-minute monologue of cataclysmic gibberish in Caryl Churchill’s “Kill” (above, 2025) — as if it were as ordinary as barroom gossip.
Conrad Ricamora
Revealing the Buddy Holly in Benigno Aquino Jr. (in the 2023 Broadway production of David Byrne and Fatboy Slim’s “Here Lies Love”) or the queer wolf in Abraham Lincoln (in Cole Escola’s “Oh, Mary!,” above, last year), Ricamora, 47, is uniquely capable of great dignity and great silliness — and, wonderfully, both together.
Andrew Scott
It’s a tough competition, but Scott, 49, may have the thinnest skin of any actor. Whether he’s onstage (playing all the characters in Simon Stephens’s Off Broadway “Vanya,” above, in 2025) or on film, every emotion — especially rue — reads right through his translucence.
Michael Patrick Thornton
Some actors are hedgehogs, projecting one idea blazingly. Thornton, 47, is a fox, carefully hoarding ideas and motivations. Keeping you guessing as Jessica Chastain’s benefactor in the 2023 revival of Henrik Ibsen’s “A Doll’s House” or as a pathetic lackey in last year’s production of Samuel Beckett’s “Waiting for Godot” (above, center), he holds you in his thrall.
More in Theater
See the rest of the issue
How can people possibly afford to live in one of the most expensive cities on the planet? It’s a question New Yorkers hear a lot, often delivered with a mix of awe, pity and confusion.
We surveyed hundreds of New Yorkers about how they spend, splurge and save. We found that many people — rich, poor or somewhere in between — live life as a series of small calculations that add up to one big question: What makes living in New York worth it?
Here’s one way to make New York more affordable: triple your income. After moving from Baton Rouge, La., in 2016 to attend graduate school, Daniel Babin lived mostly on red beans and rice or homemade “slop pots,” renting rooms in what he called a “cult house” and a building on a block his girlfriend was afraid to visit.
Then, in January, he got a job as a geologist with a mineral exploration company, with a salary of $200,000, plus a $15,000 signing bonus. A new city suddenly opened up to him. “I can take a woman out on a $300 dinner date and not look at the check and not feel bad about it,” he said. He also now has health insurance.
Mr. Babin, 32, a marine geologist who also leads an acoustic string band, now navigates two economic worlds, one shaped to his postdoctoral income of $70,000 a year — when his idea of a date was a walk in Central Park — and the other reflecting his new income. In this world, he is shopping for a vintage Martin Dreadnought guitar, for which he will gladly drop $4,000.
Finding a New Base Line
On a recent morning at Mr. Babin’s home in Bushwick, Brooklyn, where he shares a 6,800-square-foot cohousing space with 17 roommates, he was still figuring out how to manage this split.
“I’m feeling less inclined to just let it rip than I was a few months ago,” he said of his spending habits. He socks away $1,500 from each paycheck, and has not moved to replace his 2003 Toyota Corolla, an “absolute dump” given to him by his father. “Hopefully, I’m returning a little bit to some kind of base-line lifestyle that I’ve established for myself over the last five years,” he continued. “Because the fear is lifestyle inflation. You don’t want to just make more money to spend more money. That’s not the point, right?”
Lightning Lofts, the cohousing space where Mr. Babin has lived since January 2024, bills itself as part of a “social wellness movement” and seeks to continue the ethos of Burning Man, the annual communal art and cultural festival in the Nevada desert.
For a room with an elevated loft bed and use of common areas, Mr. Babin pays $1,400 a month in rent, plus another $250 for utilities and weekly housecleaning.
He was first drawn to the organization through its events, including open mic “salons” where he played music or read from his science fiction writings. These were free or very cheap nights out, unpredictable and fascinating.
“You would see dance and tonal singing, and some dude wrote an algorithm that can auto-generate A.I. video based on what you’re saying — beautiful storytelling,” he said.
“So I just showed up every month, basically, until they let me live here.”
The room was a good deal. He had looked at a nearby building where the rent was $1,900 for a room in a basement apartment that flooded once a month. “Ridiculous,” he said.
But beyond its financial appeal, Mr. Babin liked the loft’s social life. “I used to be chronically lonely, and I just don’t feel lonely anymore,” he said. “Which is fantastic in a crazy place like New York. It’s so alive and it’s so isolating at the same time.”
Splurging on Ski Trips
Before Mr. Babin got his new job, he used to go to restaurants with friends and not eat, trying to save up $35 for a “burner” party — in the spirit of Burning Man — or Ecstatic Dance, a recurring substance-free dance party. He loved to ski but could not afford a hotel, so he would carry his old skis and beat-up boots to southern Vermont and back on the same day.
“Going on a hike is a pretty cheap hobby,” he said, recalling his money-saving measures. “Living without health insurance is a good one.”
He still appreciates a good hike, he said. But on a recent ski trip, he splurged on new $700 boots and another $300 worth of gear. “I’m like, this is something I’ve wanted for 10 years, so I deserve it,” he said.
He bought a $600 drone to take pictures for his social media accounts, and then promptly crashed it into the Caribbean (he’s now replacing the rotors in hopes of returning it to health).
He cut out the red beans and rice, he said, but his usual meal is still a modest $13 sandwich from the nearby bodega or $10 for pizza. “If I’m getting takeout and it’s less than $17, I don’t feel too bad about it,” he said.
A Future After Cohousing
A big change is that dating is much more comfortable now, and he feels more attractive as a marriage prospect. “It turns out that a lot more people pay attention to you if you offer them dinner instead of a walk in the park,” he said.
He is now thinking of leaving the cohousing space — not just because he can afford to, but because his work has kept him from joining house events, like the regular potluck dinners. “I sometimes feel like a bad roommate, because part of being here is participating,” he said. “I feel like there might be someone who would enjoy the community aspect more than I’m capable of contributing right now.”
He sounds almost wistful in discussing his former economizing. If it weren’t for the dating issue, he said, he would not need the higher income or lifestyle upgrades. “I never really felt like I was compromising on what I wanted to do,” he said.
He paused. “It’s just that what I was comfortable with has changed a little bit.”
We are talking to New Yorkers about how they spend, splurge and save.
-
Mississippi5 minutes agoMississippi Lottery Mississippi Match 5, Cash 3 results for April 19, 2026
-
Missouri11 minutes ago
Missouri Lottery Pick 3, Pick 4 winning numbers for April 19, 2026
-
Montana17 minutes ago
Montana Lottery Big Sky Bonus results for April 19, 2026
-
Nebraska23 minutes ago
Nebraska Lottery results: See winning numbers for Pick 3, Pick 5 on April 19, 2026
-
Nevada29 minutes agoArmed Robbery at the Tamarack Casino
-
New Hampshire35 minutes ago
NH Lottery Pick 3 Day, Pick 3 Evening winning numbers for April 19, 2026
-
New Jersey41 minutes ago
NJ Lottery Pick-3, Pick-4, Cash 5, Millionaire for Life winning numbers for Sunday, April 19
-
New Mexico47 minutes agoLos Alamos Public Schools Students Compete At 2026 New Mexico State Science & Engineering Fair