TITLE

The Supreme Court and the First Amendment: 1988-1989

PUB. DATE
October 1990
SOURCE
Free Speech Yearbook;1990, Vol. 28, p152
SOURCE TYPE
Academic Journal
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
The article focuses on the amendments of libel law and First Amendment in the U.S. Supreme Court in 1988-1989. It mentions that the existing law for libel does not adequately protect both parties in terms of reputation of a person and freedom of the journalists. It states that neither side of a libel suit can afford the truth be exclusive as intended under the Reform Act. It also discusses several cases that support the amendments of libel including New York Times v. Sullivan, Ronald W. Sappenfield v. Indiana, and Texas v. Johnson.
ACCESSION #
76404173

 

Related Articles

  • WHITHER THE "PATHS OF GLORY": THE SCOPE OF THE NEW YORK TIMES RULE IN DEFAMATION CLAIMS BY FORMER PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND CANDIDATES. King, Joseph H. // Vermont Law Review;Winter2013, Vol. 38 Issue 2, p275 

    The article analyzes the scope of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, supporting the freedom of the press, with regard to defamation claims by former public officials. It presents an analysis of the status of a former public official in various situations like when...

  • When should bloggers count as journalists in defamation suits? Hudson Jr., David L. // ABA Journal;Jul2014, p1 

    The article presents a reprint of the article ""Blogger Gets Press Pass: In defamation case, online writer is now a journalist" that appeared in the July 2014 issue of the "ABA Journal." It focuses on the bloggers receiving traditional defamation-law protections from defamation suits as...

  • A Newsworthiness Privilege for Republished Defamation of Public Figures. Donnelly, Matthew J. // Iowa Law Review;3/1/2009, Vol. 94 Issue 3, p1023 

    When the media knowingly republish defamation of public figures, the media are subject to possible libel actions by the defamed parties to the same extent as the original defaming parties, even when the defamatory statements are themselves newsworthy in context. This is the dilemma created by...

  • "Actual Malice" in U.S. Defamation Law: The Minority of One Doctrine in the World? Youm, Kyu Ho // Journal of International Entertainment & Media Law;2011/2012, Vol. 4 Issue 1, p1 

    The article presents an analysis of the methods in which actual malice, an important aspect of defamation law in the U.S., has been adapted and reimagined in other jurisdictions around the world. It informs that in an American perspective, the "actual malice" rule, which the U.S. Supreme Court...

  • Policy on complaints about nonacceptance of 'editorial advertising'.  // Columbia Journalism Review;Sep/Oct1978, Vol. 17 Issue 3, p91 

    This article provides information on the lack of policy of the National News Council relating to the fairness of decisions by news organizations on the acceptability of advertising. The reasons behind the decision of the organization not to accept complaints concerning commercial advertising...

  • License to Hunt.  // Wilson Quarterly;Winter2004, Vol. 28 Issue 1, p107 

    Examines the article "Judging Reputation: Realism and Common Law in Justice White's Defamation Jurisprudence," by John C. P. Goldberg, published in the Fall 2003 issue of the "University of Colorado Review." Overview of the 1964 ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court on the case "New York Times"...

  • UNDERSTANDING THE FIRST AMENDMENT. Post, Robert // Washington Law Review;Jun2012, Vol. 87 Issue 2, p549 

    The article discusses the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution as of June 2012, including an analysis of its application in cases involving Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs), as well as libel litigation involving freedom of the press concerns. The U.S. Supreme Court...

  • U.S. Supreme Court Justices and Press Access. Jones, RonNell Andersen // Brigham Young University Law Review;2012, Vol. 2012 Issue 6, p1791 

    The article discusses the relationship between the U.S. Supreme Court and the press as of December 2012, focusing on several complaints related to an apparent lack of media access at the court, including the court's reported role in hampering the efforts of the media to report on court-related...

  • NEW YORK TIMES V. SULLIVAN.  // Communication: Journalism Education Today;Spring2007, Vol. 40 Issue 3, p26 

    The article discusses the U.S. Supreme Court case, New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. It is a case that established the actual malice standard before considering press reports as a form of defamation or libel. The decision in the case demonstrates the support for freedom of the press. Facts of the...

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of THE LIBRARY OF VIRGINIA

Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics