| Venue: | SCOTUS |
| Facts: | An AL official sues the NYT for publishing an advertisement unfavorable to those seen as hostile to the civil rights movement. |
| Posture: | Victory in AL court, award of $500K. |
| Issue: | Does the NYT forfeit its constitutional protection by the falsity of some of its statements and alleged defamation of the respondent? |
| Holding: | No. |
| Rule: | Only actual malice would do this. |
| Reasoning: | Repression can only be justified by a clear an present danger of the
obstruction of justice. What a state can't do by its criminal
laws it can't due in its civil courts either.
At worst this is negligence, but that's not enough to show actual malice. We can't tolerate the possibility that a good-faith critic of the government will be penalized for his criticism. |
| Dicta: | |