Saturday, July 10, 2021

U.S. Justices Thomas, Gorsuch Question Libel Protections for Media; Say Court Should Revisit Libel Standard for Public Figures: Both Said Today’s News Media Environment Played a Role In Their View the Court Needed to Reassess Libel Protections, and related stories

REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst/File Photo
U.S. Justices Thomas, Gorsuch question libel protections for media
The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday turned away a case challenging libel protections for journalists and media organizations, but conservative justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch disagreed with the action and questioned such protections enshrined in a landmark 1964 ruling.
Citing a rapidly changing media environment increasingly rife with disinformation, Thomas and Gorsuch said in separate opinions that the court should take a fresh look at its precedents that make it harder for public figures to sue for defamation.
The court declined to take up an appeal by Shkelzën Berisha, the son of a former Albanian prime minister, concerning his defamation lawsuit over corruption allegations against him made in a 2015 book by author Guy Lawson called "Arms and the Dudes." The book was turned into the 2016 Hollywood film "War Dogs" starring Jonah Hill and Miles Teller.
A lower court ruled in favor of Lawson, the book's publisher Simon & Schuster and several other defendants because it determined Berisha was unable to show that allegations of his involvement in an arms-dealing scandal were made with "actual malice." That standard, which protects against libel suits, involves statements made with knowledge that they were false or with reckless disregard of whether they were true or false. --->READ MORE HERE
Thomas, Gorsuch say court should revisit libel standard for public figures
Both justices said today’s news media environment played a role in their view the court needed to reassess libel protections
Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch disagreed with the high court’s decision to turn away a case that challenged libel protections for journalists and the media.
Both justices said today’s news media environment played a role in their view the court needed to reassess libel protections.
A landmark 1964 case determined that public figures had to prove false statements made about them in the media were intentionally harmful. Thomas questioned the "actual malice" standard from the New York Times vs. Sullivan case. The case determined that public figures had a higher burden to prove defamation than private ones. Public figures have to prove that a statement made was known to be false and made with disregard for its accuracy. The case has made it difficult for libel cases to succeed.
The court declined to take up an appeal Shkelzën Berisha, the son of a former Albanian prime minister, over his portrayal in the 2015 book "Arms and the Dudes," which was later turned into the 2016 film ‘War Dogs.’ --->READ MORE HERE
Follow links below to related stories:

Conservative Supreme Court justices question ruling protecting press

Thomas, Gorsuch suggest high court should revisit defamation law

Supreme Court Refuses to Hear ‘War Dogs’ Defamation Case

If you like what you see, please "Like" us on Facebook either here or here. Please follow us on Twitter here.


No comments: