Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas filed a concurring opinion in the denial of certiorari in a case involving the libel/slander of a public figure. The details of the case are unimportant. What is important is that Thomas says that it is time for SCOTUS to reconsider the "federal" rule regarding defamation and the First Amendment. For 170 years after the First Amendment was adopted, libel and slander laws were the province of the states. Then, about 50 years ago, the Supreme Court stepped in an created a new rule in the Sullivan case that provided that a public figure could not recover for defamation unless that person could show actual malice by the person publishing the defamatory statements. Thomas points out that there is no Constitutional basis for this rule; it is just something that the Court put in place by itself.
Since the Thomas opinion was issued, all sorts of people are going nuts on the internet denouncing it. Imagine, if the Sullivan rule were overturned, media like the newspapers, TV news and the like would actually have to work to get things correct or they might be subject to damages for libel. For half a century, the media has been able to get away with defaming one after another public figure while knowing that they were immune from essentially any lawsuit seeking compensation for the damage being done by the Fake News. The result has been an extremely lazy group of reporters. If they see something on Twitter, they report it whether or not it is true. Just think back to the Kavanaugh hearings if you want a good example of false news being published which really hurt the reputation of an individual. Wouldn't it be a good thing to stop that sort of mess?
Since the Thomas opinion was issued, all sorts of people are going nuts on the internet denouncing it. Imagine, if the Sullivan rule were overturned, media like the newspapers, TV news and the like would actually have to work to get things correct or they might be subject to damages for libel. For half a century, the media has been able to get away with defaming one after another public figure while knowing that they were immune from essentially any lawsuit seeking compensation for the damage being done by the Fake News. The result has been an extremely lazy group of reporters. If they see something on Twitter, they report it whether or not it is true. Just think back to the Kavanaugh hearings if you want a good example of false news being published which really hurt the reputation of an individual. Wouldn't it be a good thing to stop that sort of mess?
No comments:
Post a Comment