A bombshell legal ruling has struck a blow to the investigative outlet Correctiv regarding its coverage of an infamous Potsdam meeting involving the Alternative of Germany (AfD). The Berlin Regional Court has issued a prohibition against the central claim that a “master plan for the expulsion of German citizens” was designed during the gathering, labeling the assertion a “false statement of fact.”
This development marks a significant setback for the NGO, which receives funding from George Soros’ Open Society Foundations, as well as the German government.
According to the Höcker law firm, which cited a dpa reporter, the court rejected the narrative that had originally sparked nationwide political outrage and massive demonstrations across Germany against the AfD shortly before national elections. The controversial report, published over two years ago, suggested that high-level plans for mass expulsions were being drafted, leading hundreds of thousands of citizens and top government representatives from the SPD, Greens, FDP, and CDU/CSU to take to the streets.
The legal challenge was spearheaded by Gerrit Huy, an AfD member of the Bundestag and meeting participant, who sued the outlet. Her attorney, Carsten Brennecke, said that he was informed by a journalist on-site that “Correctiv lost today before the Berlin Regional Court.”
“The following core statements from the Correctiv report ‘Secret Plan Against Germany’ on the so-called Potsdam meeting, which we challenged as false factual assertions on behalf of the meeting participant Gerrit Huy, have been banned by the court according to the dpa: ‘A master plan for the deportation of German citizens remains from the Potsdam meeting, and Martin Sellner expressed an idea for denaturalization in his lecture,'” wrote Brennecke.
+++Breaking News: Correctiv hat vor dem Landgericht Berlin verloren: Deren Kernaussagen im Bericht zum Potsdam-Treffen wurden gerade verboten, berichtet die DPA:
Mir hat die Redakteurin der dpa, die die Urteilsverkündung nach der heutigen mündlichen Verhandlung im Klageverfahren… https://t.co/NSZwgq0Kwl
— Carsten Brennecke (@RABrennecke) March 17, 2026Furthermore, Brennecke successfully argued that Sellner never made the claims about the mass expulsion of German citizens, as Correctiv claimed.
“We had challenged these statements as false assertions because it is undisputed that no plan for the deportation of German citizens was presented in Potsdam, and Mr. (Martin) Sellner also did not express any idea to denaturalize Germans,” Brennecke added.
The court ruled against the outlet on another count. Huy successfully challenged a more recent report where Correctiv used a “key witness,” Erik Ahrens, to claim Huy had proposed stripping dual citizens of their German nationality. As Huy never made such a statement, the court reportedly banned the claim.
“In a more recent report, Correctiv had also disseminated the statement by Erik Ahrens, which we challenged as a false assertion, that Ms. Gerrit Huy had proposed in Potsdam to take away German citizenship from Germans with dual citizenship. Ms. Huy did not make such a proposal in Potsdam. This statement has also been banned for Correctiv, according to the dpa,” wrote Brennecke.
In its defense, the media outlet argued that the disputed segments were “permissible expressions of opinion” rather than “statements of fact,” which would place them under the protection of freedom of expression. However, the court disagreed, identifying them as false factual allegations.
The editor of Correctiv, Justus von Daniels, announced he would appeal the decision.
“We are very surprised by the ruling of the Berlin Regional Court, especially in comparison to the clearly won case in Hamburg,” Daniels told the dpa news agency. He asserted that “the undisputed core facts of our research were not attacked, only two journalistic assessments.”
Huy’s lawyer, Carsten Brennecke, however, responded, saying: “We were compelled to believe that core statements are understood as statements of fact.”
Brennecke asserted that “the Correctiv report on the Potsdam meeting collapsed like a house of cards.”
He stated that the media reports that “frightened thousands of Germans” into believing that “the expulsion and expatriation of Germans had been planned in Potsdam and thus drove them to demonstrations in the streets are now off the table, banned, and prohibited by the courts.”
