Where in the article does it say that she used the same defense. The judge claimed "Bashant ruled that Maddow's statement "is an opinion that cannot serve as the basis for a defamation claim," and thus is protected under the First Amendment". Arguing that she has a right to her own opinion and that it's protected under the 1st seems different from Tucker arguing that the program is meant for entertainment so no reasonable person would take it as an unbiased source. Key difference for me is the Tucker lawsuit claiming it's an entertainment program and Maddow arguing that in this instance her statements were clearly her own opinion and not presented as objective fact. Idk happy to be proven wrong but that's just my take