The easier it is to go after the press for slander, the easier it would be to go after Trump—and he’s a target-rich environment.
Susan E. Seager
05.04.17 6:02 AM ET
Imagine a world where President Donald Trump’s dream to “change libel laws,” as he recently tweeted, comes true.
Let’s say the Supreme Court overrules several of its past First Amendment rulings, stripping away strong protections for free speech and a free press.
It would be open season for Trump to be sued for his inflammatory tweets.
Trump might have even lost the $4-million libel lawsuit filed against him by political consultant, Cheri Jacobus, after Trump tweeted that Jacobus “begged” for a job for the Trump campaign, has “zero credibility,” and is a “major loser.” The New York judge in that case dismissed the lawsuit against Trump in January, ruling that Trump’s tweets from his personal account are protected by the First Amendment as non-factual hyperbole. Jacobus is appealing the dismissal.
The judge explained that Trump’s tweets are not given “serious consideration” as factual reports because Trump’s tweets were “rife with vague and simplistic insults such as ‘loser’ or ‘total loser’ or ‘totally biased loser,’ ‘dummy’ or ‘dope’ or ‘dumb,’ ‘zero/no credibility,’ ‘crazy’ or ‘wacko’ and ‘disaster.’” (PDF)
Perhaps Trump hopes the Supreme Court also will weaken the First Amendment protections for heated political speech so he can sue his political opponents.
But if the Supreme Court weakened protections for political speech, then Trump might lose a lawsuit filed against him by three protesters who claim that he incited violence against them by shouting to his supporters “get ’em out of here” at a March 2016 rally in Kentucky.
Trump’s lawyers might have to stop arguing that he “was not ‘inciting a riot’ but was rather exercising a core First Amendment freedom” when he said “get ’em out of here” and “don’t hurt ’em,” as his lawyers argued in a recent motion asking the court to dismiss the lawsuit.
So far, the federal judge presiding over the Kentucky lawsuit has rejected Trump’s First Amendment arguments, refusing to dismiss the case in a March 31 ruling. But it is early in the case and the court could accept Trump’s First Amendment arguments.
The libel rule that Trump hates the most and wishes the Supreme Court would change is the “actual malice” rule.
More:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/05/04/if-trump-loosened-up-libel-laws-he-would-get-sued-into-oblivion
