Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Justice Thomas calls for reexamining landmark libel decision in case involving Cosby accuser
Justice Thomas calls for reexamining landmark libel decision in case involving Cosby accuser
Link to tweet
Courts & Law
Justice Thomas calls for reexamining landmark libel decision in case involving Cosby accuser
By Robert Barnes
Reporter covering the U.S. Supreme Court
February 19 at 10:59 AM
Justice Clarence Thomas called Tuesday for reconsidering the Supreme Courts landmark decision making it more difficult for public officials to claim defamation as the court turned down a request from an accuser of Bill Cosby. ... The court declined to take the case of Kathrine McKee, who accused Cosby of raping her more than 40 years ago. She sued after Cosbys attorney leaked a letter that she said distorted her background to damage her reputation for truthfulness and honesty and to shame her.
But the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit said McKee had thrust herself into the national #metoo movement with her allegations. As a public figure, the court said she had to show that comments about her were made with actual malice and disregard for the truth, the standard set by the Supreme Courts 1964 decision in New York Times v. Sullivan.
Thomas said he agreed with his colleagues not to accept McKees factbound appeal. ... But he launched a detailed critique of the landmark libel ruling, which he said was a policy-driven decision masquerading as constitutional law. No other justice joined his concurrence.
[The disconnect between President Trump and his administration on freedom of the press]
But President Trump has also expressed support for making it easier to sue for defamation, most often directing criticism at the news media. Over the weekend, he complained about a Saturday Night Live skit, and wondered about retribution. ... Thomas said the court may have intruded into a space in which it was not needed with the New York Times decision. ... We should not continue to reflexively apply this policy driven approach to the Constitution, Thomas wrote. Instead, we should carefully examine the original meaning of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. If the Constitution does not require public figures to satisfy an actual-malice standard in state-law defamation suits, then neither should we.
....
Robert Barnes has been a Washington Post reporter and editor since 1987. He joined The Post to cover Maryland politics, and he has served in various editing positions, including metropolitan editor and national political editor. He has covered the Supreme Court since November 2006. Follow https://twitter.com/scotusreporter
Justice Thomas calls for reexamining landmark libel decision in case involving Cosby accuser
By Robert Barnes
Reporter covering the U.S. Supreme Court
February 19 at 10:59 AM
Justice Clarence Thomas called Tuesday for reconsidering the Supreme Courts landmark decision making it more difficult for public officials to claim defamation as the court turned down a request from an accuser of Bill Cosby. ... The court declined to take the case of Kathrine McKee, who accused Cosby of raping her more than 40 years ago. She sued after Cosbys attorney leaked a letter that she said distorted her background to damage her reputation for truthfulness and honesty and to shame her.
But the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit said McKee had thrust herself into the national #metoo movement with her allegations. As a public figure, the court said she had to show that comments about her were made with actual malice and disregard for the truth, the standard set by the Supreme Courts 1964 decision in New York Times v. Sullivan.
Thomas said he agreed with his colleagues not to accept McKees factbound appeal. ... But he launched a detailed critique of the landmark libel ruling, which he said was a policy-driven decision masquerading as constitutional law. No other justice joined his concurrence.
[The disconnect between President Trump and his administration on freedom of the press]
But President Trump has also expressed support for making it easier to sue for defamation, most often directing criticism at the news media. Over the weekend, he complained about a Saturday Night Live skit, and wondered about retribution. ... Thomas said the court may have intruded into a space in which it was not needed with the New York Times decision. ... We should not continue to reflexively apply this policy driven approach to the Constitution, Thomas wrote. Instead, we should carefully examine the original meaning of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. If the Constitution does not require public figures to satisfy an actual-malice standard in state-law defamation suits, then neither should we.
....
Robert Barnes has been a Washington Post reporter and editor since 1987. He joined The Post to cover Maryland politics, and he has served in various editing positions, including metropolitan editor and national political editor. He has covered the Supreme Court since November 2006. Follow https://twitter.com/scotusreporter
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
2 replies, 1210 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (5)
ReplyReply to this post
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Justice Thomas calls for reexamining landmark libel decision in case involving Cosby accuser (Original Post)
mahatmakanejeeves
Feb 2019
OP
dalton99a
(81,708 posts)1. "Clarence is such a nice dog"
MosheFeingold
(3,051 posts)2. How is this a partisan issue
It's not like Fox News or Brietbart doesn't lie all the time about public figures.