Had the Times not published a correction to the editorial in question they would most likely be liable for defamation. But....they did publish a correction. The issue for the courts will be whether or not the retraction was adequate. They could have done a better job of correcting their error since it was so defamatory. This is a part of the problem with retractions almost always being buried in tiny print somewhere far away from the front page.

My wife and I were right across the street from the Safeway shopping center having coffee when Giffords and the other people were shot by Jared Loughner. Despite initial attempts to suggest he was politically motivated, in the end it turned out he was simply an emotionally disturbed young man who had been enabled by his parents and some administrators of the local community college who pretty much refused to get any treatment for him when he showed signs of potentially violent mental illness.