Expert: Sarah Palin's case against The New York Times is a landmine for the First Amendment

[srose58089]

This is a well written opinion piece and while long should be read in full. We all take for granted our first amendment right of free speech but with tRump appointed judges this could change.


https://www.rawstory.com/palin-v-new-york-times/

For more than half a century, conservatives have wanted to eradicate New York Times v. Sullivan, the 1964 Supreme Court decision that is the nation's most important First Amendment case. A trial scheduled for February 1 may give them that opportunity. If the Supreme Court invalidates NYT, federal judges—including the 230 appointed by President Trump—will preside over more libel suits against journalists he calls "the enemy of the people." Those judges can carry out Trump's promise to "open up…libel laws…[and] have people sue you like you've never got sued before."

Anyone who makes factual errors when criticizing government or accusing a person of misconduct could be dragged into court and left destitute by a jury's verdict or legal bills. Public officials with government jobs and public figures—those who are well-known or have entered a public controversy—can win lawsuits that previously would have been unsuccessful.

The NYT ruling is essential to our democracy because it protects discussion of political issues and the fitness of those seeking public office. Justice William Brennan's famous passage in the case exemplifies its significance: "Thus, we consider this case against the background of a profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open, and that it may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials."

The case arose when civil rights leaders, clergy, and celebrities purchased a full-page ad in the New York Times in 1960 to protest the treatment of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and other civil rights activists by southern authorities and to seek financial support. The ad, with the heading "Heed Their Rising Voices," contained several errors related to the actions of Alabama officials.

I am trying to envision just how much "textualist" judges can take our constitution back to the 18th century and keep shaking my head is disbelief.

[FakeNoose]

1. If this gets overturned, it will put the US news media out of business

No newspaper, television, cable, or internet news publisher will ever be able to afford liability insurance. They'll all shut down, and the US will never have news coverage ever again.

Is that what they want?

[yonder]

2. Not good if overturned, but it will be a two-edged sword.

I would guess the right-wing mouthpieces might have even more to lose.