Justice Clarence Thomas calls for reconsideration of landmark libel case — CNN

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.”

His position echoes complaints of President Donald Trump, who has called for libel laws to be reconsidered in light of news stories about him, said CNN Supreme Court analyst and University of Texas School of Law professor Steve Vladeck.

Sure is strange that so many public figures have been able to manage being targeted on SNL without a Supreme Court justice suggested that laws should be changed.


There’s a reason Roberts doesn’t, and Rehnquist before him didn’t, assign this guy any important opinions.

As if Trump never smeared anyone’s name.

1 Like

But what do you think about what he said. Do you not think the States have approached it correctly?

This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.