
Justice Clarence Thomas believes we should take another look at our current libel laws.
Justice Clarence Thomas, in a concurring opinion released Tuesday, called for reversing decades of jurisprudence that has made it harder for public figures to sue media outlets and other organizations for defamation — restrictions that were premised, he said, on a series of “policy-driven decisions masquerading as constitutional law.”
I’m sure President Trump is pleased. After all, he’s kinda been hoping it’d be revisited at some point. Remember this?
In finding a constitutional basis for its ruling superseding that common law, the Sullivan court relied heavily on opposition by the founding fathers, including James Madison, to the Sedition Act of 1798, which would have prohibited any “false” or “scandalous” writings against government officers.
According to Thomas, though, the fact that the framers opposed criminal punishment for criticisms of public officials did not necessarily mean they opposed providing an accessible civil defamation remedy for those politicians. In fact, Thomas said, the founders consistently opposed using federal law to override state common law, which controlled defamation actions at the time.
Still with us?
“The common law of libel at the time the First and 14th Amendments were ratified did not require public figures to satisfy any kind of heightened liability standard as a condition of recovering damages,” Thomas wrote.
“Far from increasing a public figure’s burden in a defamation action, the common law deemed libels against public figures to be, if anything, more serious and injurious than ordinary libels,” he continued. “Libel of a public official was deemed an offense ‘most dangerous to the people, and deserv[ing of] punishment, because the people may be deceived and reject the best citizens to their great injury, and it may be to the loss of their liberties.'”
Interestingly enough, no other justice sided with Thomas.
People are freaking out and accusing Thomas of hating free speech.
It’s quite the conundrum. I obviously understand the concern, but it’s incredibly disingenuous for all of these fearmongery liberals to pretend that MSM’s constant #FakeNews coverage of people they hate (AKA Trump or any conservative, for that matter) is perfectly OK. It’s absolutely not.
Thoughts?
h/t Fox News