Ep. 181 New York Times v. Sullivan and its future

The seminal 1964 Supreme Court decision in New York Times v.
Sullivan limited the ability of public officials to silence their
critics by successfully suing them for defamation. Sullivan made
“American public officials more accountable, the American media
more watchful, and the American people better informed,” said
William Rehnquist, the late Chief Justice of the Supreme
Court.

But Sullivan is increasingly under attack from politicians,
activists, and even sitting Justices of the Supreme Court. They
believe the decision went too far, enabling the news media and
others to defame others with little-to-no consequence.

On today’s show, we are joined by lawyers Floyd Abrams (Cahill
Gordon & Reindel), JT Morris (FIRE), and Matthew Schafer
(Fordham Law) to discuss New York Times v. Sullivan and its
future.

Show notes:


Transcript



 New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964)




“Two Justices Say Supreme Court Should Reconsider Landmark
Libel Decision” by Adam Liptak




“How to Restore Balance to Libel Law” by Glenn Reynolds




Florida HB 991, the anti-Sullivan bill




Matthew Schafer’s tweet thread on Florida’s HB 991




“New York Times v. Sullivan and the Forgotten Session of the
US Supreme Court” by Matthew Schafer




“The Most Important Supreme Court Precedent for Freedom of
the Press Is in Jeopardy” by Matthew Schafer and Jeff Kosseff




 


www.sotospeakpodcast.com


YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@freespeechtalk


Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/freespeechtalk


Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sotospeakpodcast


Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/freespeechtalk/


Email us: sotospeak@thefire.org