Is Clarence Thomas headed out or just getting started? – CNNPolitics

In his opinion on Tuesday — which was technically a concurrence on a denial of cert for a speech related case — Thomas complained that under the Court’s First Amendment precedents, “public figures are barred from recovering damages for defamation unless they can show that the statement at issue was made with ‘actual malice’ — that is, with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.”
The rulings subject plaintiffs to an almost “impossible standard,” Thomas wrote, and that instead of “simply applying” the First Amendment as it was understood by the people who ratified it, the Court had drifted into the realm of policy and fashioned its own rule.
— Read on

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s