The civil liberties that the American people have are inalienable rights. The most important of these is the freedom of speech. Yet freedom of speech is not entirely protected; using hurtful, false, or damaging speech is not allowed. But how can the American government control something as basic as speech? There are laws against libel and slander but how are they perpetrated? This essay will explain how the court cases and laws have evolved and been clarified throughout America’s history up to present day.
The meaning of libel is a false and malicious publication printed for the purpose of defaming a living person. Now there have been hundreds of cases of libel in the United States. Some significant court cases are ones like New York Times Co. v Sullivan 376 U.S. 254 (1964). This case was about the alleged libel of Montgomery, Alabama. Commissioner L. B. Sullivan in the New York Times Magazine. The New York times supported Martin Luther King Jr. and his innocence in an alleged perjusry charge, Dr. king was accused of lieing under oath. This court case was one of the first major cases that established the principle of Actual Malice. Now Actual malice is the legal principle that the person printing the article had full knowledge that the statement was false or that the publisher acted recklessly in their disregard of finding if the statement was true or false. But the problem with this it is extremely hard to prove what is in a person’s head. This case was also a landmark case because before it, many news companies would not report on civil rights issues for fear of being sued for libel, but after this case companies were free to report on these issues. It allowed free speech to prevail in the United States. The case was seen as a...
... middle of paper ...
...5 Nov. 2007 .
"Gertz V. Robert Welch Inc." Oyez.Com. Oyez. 25 Nov. 2007 .
"New York Times Co. V. Sullivan." www.bc.edu. 25 Nov. 2007 .
"New York Times V. Sullivan." Oyez.Com. Oyez. 25 Nov. 2007 .
"Curtis Publishing Co. V. Butts." www.bc.edu. 25 Nov. 2007 .
"CURTIS PUBLISHING CO. V. BUTTS, 388 U.S. 130 (1967)." Findlaw.Com. 25 Nov. 2007 .
"Defamation, Libel and Slander Law." Expertlaw.Com. 25 Nov. 2007 .
The Web. The Web. 12 Jan 2012. http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0372_0335_ZS.html. "Gideon v. Wainwright.
A) McGeary, Johanna. McCarthy's First Slander. Time, 3/31/2003, Vol. 161 Issue 13, pA28,1/4p 1bw; (AN 9349282)
“NEW YORK TIMES v. UNITED STATES.” The Oyez Project. llT Chicago-Kent College Of Law, n.d. Web. 5 Dec. 2013.
Alonso, Karen. Schenck v. United States: restrictions on free speech. Springfield, NJ: Enslow Publishers, 1999. Print.
Justice Jackson's disagreement on the ruling of the Terminiello case is supported by many historical examples which demonstrate that freedom of speech is not an absolute right under the law. Although Terminiello had a right to exercise his right under the First Amendment, had the majority carefully considered this principle it should have rejected his claim. In this case, the majority's treatment of Terminiello's case skirted the real issue and did not benefit from true constitutional interpretation.
Freedom of speech has been a controversial issue throughout the world. Our ability to say whatever we want is very important to us as individuals and communities. Although freedom of speech and expression may sometimes be offensive to other people, it is still everyone’s right to express his/her opinion under the American constitution which states that “congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press”. Although this amendment gave people the right express thier opinions, it still rests in one’s own hands as how far they will go to exercise that right of freedom of speech.
Peter, Sagal. “Should There Be Limits on Freedom of Speech?” 25 March. 2013. PSB. PBS.com 14 Nov.
In 1954, Sam Sheppard was accused of allegedly killing his wife, Marilyn. During this time, the media went absolutely wild. The way they obtained their stories was completely unlike any way they had gone about getting stories before. They completely invaded Sheppard's privacy to obtain "good" stories for their papers and television newscasts. Also, more stories were written about the case than any other event that had been covered in the past. Even the way stories were written was different than the usual style of writing used for that time period. Ethics were completely disregarded during the case. Because of this, Sheppard was released from prison, with the reason that the media had influenced the case so that the jury found him guilty based on the news stories. This had never happened before. Due to the unethical practices displayed by the media, the field of journalism instituted practices, which limited the power of the press.
David Bernstein is to be congratulated on so clearly, vividly, analytically and accurately showing seriousness of these new threats to free speech and civil liberties in the US. The Cato Institute also deserves credit for publishing the book since in Bernstein’s words ‘authors who take politically incorrect positions . . . face a particularly difficult time finding publishers among leading trade presses’ (p. ix). Cato at least is still the land of the free and the home of the brave.
Libel simply is "defamation of character by published word", the publishing of falsities to hurt a person's reputation or standing. However, now it is not limited to only printed word as in newspapers or magazines. Slander, which is defined as "defamation of character by spoken word" is now portrayed as a form of libel because of the abundance and power the broadcast spoken word can have as in radio and television. However, libel has a much stronger penalty than that of slander because print is seen to have a much more long lasting effect, and once something is on paper you cant take it back. On the other hand, with tape recordings and the fact that any spoken defamation can de saved and distributed, radio and TV most times fall in the libel category.
Remy, Richard C., Gary E. Clayton, and John J. Patrick. "Supreme Court Cases." Civics Today. Columbus, Ohio: Glencoe, 2008. 796. Print.
The articles "Freedom of Speech: Missouri Knights of the Ku Klux Klan v. Kansas City" and "Freedom of Religion: Lyng v. Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective Association" both engage in conflicts pertaining to the First Amendment in the Bill of Rights.
Hall, Kermit L, eds. The Oxford guide to United States Supreme Court decisions New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.
In the book Freedom for the Thought That We Hate: A Biography of the First Amendment, the author Anthony Lewis gives us lots of law cases following by the timeline to state how the First Amendment developed and what its meaning in both law and society is. By reading this book after listening to lectures about free speech and reading A Gift of Fire written by Sara Baase, the textbook for the lecture, I have learned more detailed about the history and definition development of the freedom of speech and hence came up some new thoughts towards my life.
“A person is liable for slander if that person intentionally says that someone is a thief when she knows it is not true” is a matter that comes under the states’ own constitutions and the law procedure for this slander differs from state to state. Every state has its own discretion as to what is libel or slander, and therefore, every state has its own jurisdiction in the matter. Some states keep both the libels and slanders under the same law books and prosecute according to the criminal law. However, some states have altogether different laws for the two matters and perform its jurisdiction accordingly. The law comes under the states’ list of law matters and therefore, the federal system does not deal with slanders, libels and defamations,