Source: Fox News
Summary
Two conservative Supreme Court justices, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, criticized the majority’s decision not to take up attorney Alan Dershowitz’s defamation case against CNN. Dershowitz claimed CNN deceptively edited a clip of his defense during Trump’s first impeachment trial, damaging his reputation. The justices argued that the “actual malice” standard in evaluating defamation cases is not rooted in the Constitution and was created in the 1964 New York Times Co. v. Sullivan decision. Dershowitz said the standard is “impossible” to overcome. The case has sparked debate about revisiting longstanding libel precedent, with President Donald Trump having called for loosening U.S. libel laws in 2016.
Our Reading
As expected, the matter has reached another stage.
Justices Thomas and Gorsuch expressed their dissent, arguing that the “actual malice” standard is not rooted in the Constitution. Dershowitz claimed CNN lied about him, but the majority ruled that he had to prove “actual malice” by clear and convincing evidence. The case has sparked debate about revisiting longstanding libel precedent. The Supreme Court’s decision has left open the possibility of revisiting the Sullivan case, but such a shift appears unlikely in the near term. The familiar dance of defamation lawsuits and debates about libel laws continues.
Author: Evan Null
