{"id":29368,"date":"2016-10-11T16:36:38","date_gmt":"2016-10-11T20:36:38","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/sidebarforplaintiffs.naomifein.net\/?p=29368"},"modified":"2016-10-11T16:36:38","modified_gmt":"2016-10-11T20:36:38","slug":"defamation-trump-and-libel-law","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sidebarforplaintiffs.naomifein.net\/?p=29368","title":{"rendered":"Defamation: Trump and libel law"},"content":{"rendered":"

Trump appears to believe in a captive press, and his comments on libel evince a juvenile understanding of both the Constitution and jurisprudence.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Source, Margaret Talbot: Trump and the Truth: The \u201cLying\u201d Media – The New Yorker<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n

I’m a bit late here–this terrific Margaret Talbot article was published September 28—but it’s interesting to read now, after that second debate (Talbot wrote it after the first debate). (My brother, an inveterate newspaper reader, used to catch up on his pile of newspapers while practicing–he’s a guitarist. He said it was fascinating to read stories and opinions about news events months after the events, to see what held up as significant over time and whose comments were now glaringly idiotic.) (He no longer has piles of newspapers: he reads entirely on line nowadays.)<\/p>\n

The entire article is worth reading but just to induce salivation, here are two key paragraphs from the Talbot article. The first concerns the legal basis for limiting libel lawsuits against the press–prompted by Trump’s claim that after he’s elected he’ll “loosen up” libel laws so he can sue media that have criticized him–and the second demonstrates Trump’s ignorance of libel law:<\/p>\n

In the landmark 1964 case New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, the Supreme Court laid out the modern understanding of libel law, establishing firm protections for the press. Sullivan made it much harder for a public figure to sue a newspaper for libel or defamation, compelling a plaintiff to show that a publication had \u201cactual malice\u201d\u2014the knowledge that what it was publishing was false\u2014or that it had substantial doubts about the truth of what it what publishing. The Court set the bar as high as it did because it saw a threat to democracy in libel laws. \u201cFreedom to discuss public affairs and public officials is unquestionably . . . the kind of speech the First Amendment was primarily designed to keep within the area of free discussion,\u201d Justice Hugo Black wrote in his concurring opinion. \u201cTo punish the exercise of this right to discuss public affairs or to penalize it through libel judgments is to abridge or shut off discussion of the very kind most needed.\u201d The Sullivan ruling has been widely accepted, across the political spectrum, ever since. Even if a President Trump did have the opportunity to appoint several Supreme Court Justices, he would be hard-pressed to find a set who\u2019d overturn it.<\/em><\/p>\n

Trump\u2019s comments on libel have evinced a juvenile understanding of both the Constitution and of jurisprudence. When Fred Ryan, the publisher of the <\/em>[Washington] Post, asked Trump if, by opening up libel law, he meant weakening standards like malice, Trump said nothing to indicate that he was familiar with either the legal sense of that term or with the Sullivan decision. \u201cYeah,\u201d he said. \u201cI think I would get a little bit away from malice without having to get too totally away. Look, I think many of the stories about me are written badly.\u201d More frightening, though, is the way that Trump has spoken about the law as an instrument of personal vengeance\u2014his way of getting back at his critics and making them pay. \u201cWe\u2019re going to have people sue you like you\u2019ve never got sued before,\u201d he said, talking about reporters, at a February rally in Texas.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Trump appears to believe in a captive press, and his comments on libel evince a juvenile understanding of both the Constitution and jurisprudence. Source, Margaret Talbot: Trump and the Truth: The \u201cLying\u201d Media – The New Yorker I’m a bit … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[337,1095,727],"tags":[38,1148,1149],"class_list":["post-29368","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-legal-news","category-politics","category-lawsuits-of-the-filthy-rich-2","tag-defamation","tag-libel-law","tag-media-and-libel-law"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t