No Liberty to Libel: The Constitutional Case Against New York Times v. Sullivan

In 1964 the Supreme Court radically altered its interpretation of the First Amendment of the U.S.Constitution. In the famed libel case, New York Times v. Sullivan, the Court ruled that public officials claiming to be victims of defamation would be held to a higher standard than ordinary citizens.They must prove not only that they were victims of defamatory falsehood, but also that their defamers acted with “actual malice”: knowledge that their claim was false, or at least a reckless disregard for its truth or falsity.As a result of this ruling, newspapers cannot now be easily held liable for false defamatory statements about politicians, celebrities, or other public figures. Though many have heralded Sullivan as a landmark ruling in defense of First Amendment freedoms, in No Liberty to Libel, Carson Holloway argues that the Supreme Court erred dangerously in its interpretation of the Constitution.Holloway contends that the Court should revisit and reject the Sullivan doctrine.Holloway