The Briefing Room
General Category => Politics/Government => Topic started by: Emjay on February 19, 2019, 07:40:18 pm
-
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas on Tuesday called for reconsideration of a landmark First Amendment precedent, criticizing the 1964 decision that the Constitution creates a higher barrier for public figures to claim libel.
Thomas wrote alongside a court decision not to take up the case of a woman who accused Bill Cosby of sexual misconduct in 2014. He suggested that the seminal case New York Times v. Sullivan, holding that public figures have a higher burden to prove libel, was wrongly decided.
"New York Times and the Court's decisions extending it were policy-driven decisions masquerading as constitutional law," Thomas wrote.
"If the Constitution does not require public figures to satisfy an actual-malice standard in state-law defamation suits, then neither should we," the opinion states.
He continued, saying "We did not begin meddling in this area until 1964, nearly 175 years after the First Amendment was ratified. The States are perfectly capable of striking an acceptable balance between encouraging robust public discourse and providing a meaningful remedy for reputational harm. We should reconsider our jurisprudence in this area."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/justice-clarence-thomas-calls-for-reconsideration-of-landmark-libel-case/ar- (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/justice-clarence-thomas-calls-for-reconsideration-of-landmark-libel-case/ar-)
-
I totally agree with Justice Thomas on this issue.
He is doing that original thinking thing again. I hope he doesn't retire.
-
Freedom of the press is a guaranteed right. But the press is not guaranteed the ability to libel people with impunity.
The pendulum has swung way too far in that direction.
-
Freedom of the press is a guaranteed right. But the press is not guaranteed the ability to libel people with impunity.
The pendulum has swung way too far in that direction.
Not gonna change. Whether they're steering public opinion on social or political matters, libel has become a potent gadget in the news media's toolbox.
-
Not gonna change. Whether they're steering public opinion on social or political matters, libel has become a potent gadget in the news media's toolbox.
It will change if Justice Thomas can successfully get this issue before the court and get the current unfair ruling changed. I think he can.
-
It will change if Justice Thomas can successfully get this issue before the court and get the current unfair ruling changed. I think he can.
From your lips to God's ears.
-
From your lips to God's ears.
Thanks @verga If only.
-
IMHO, If anyone on that Court could pull this off, it would be him or Alito.
-
IMHO, If anyone on that Court could pull this off, it would be him or Alito.
Yes. I really admire Thomas. He doesn't make a big splash but he is consistently conservative.
The newbies will be great, I think, but maybe shouldn't propose controversial legislation ... just voting for it will be enough.
-
Influences
In 1975, when Thomas read Race and Economics by economist Thomas Sowell, he found an intellectual foundation for his philosophy.[9][21][22] The book criticized social reforms by government and instead argued for individual action to overcome circumstances and adversity. He was also influenced by Ayn Rand,[23] particularly The Fountainhead, and would later require his staffers to watch the 1949 film version of the novel.[9] Thomas later said that novelist Richard Wright had been the most influential writer in his life; Wright's books Native Son and Black Boy "capture[d] a lot of the feelings that I had inside that you learn how to repress."[24] Thomas acknowledges having "some very strong libertarian leanings."[25]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarence_Thomas#Federal_judge (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarence_Thomas#Federal_judge)