,
3 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
Justice Thomas rejects "actual malice" standard for defamation actions against public figures. He writes NYT v. Sullivan and Gertz were "policy-driven decisions masquerading as constitutional law." And Defendant was Bill Cosby
supremecourt.gov/orders/courtor…
supremecourt.gov/orders/courtor…
Fascinating footnote from Justice Thomas. He question "whether
the speech and press rights incorporated against the States restrict common-law rights of action that are not codified by state legislatures"
the speech and press rights incorporated against the States restrict common-law rights of action that are not codified by state legislatures"
J. Thomas: VA Resolution's (Madison) "constitutional opposition to the Sedition Act—a federal law directly criminalizing criticism of the Government—does not nec-
essarily support a constitutional actual-malice rule in all civil libel actions brought by public figures."
essarily support a constitutional actual-malice rule in all civil libel actions brought by public figures."
