5/16/2023 0 Comments Freedom of press![]() ![]() RELATED ARTICLE: Fox News is indeed a news organization: Federal Election Commission ![]() This change in the law wouldn’t only affect journalists, though. Sullivan ‘actual malice’ rule applies when the plaintiff is a public official or a public figure, and the courts have defined the category of public figure pretty broadly,” Samantha Barbas, a law professor at the University at Buffalo who focuses on First Amendment law, told Raw Story.Įssentially, the bill would make it so fewer people are considered public figures, which means the Sullivan rules would apply to fewer cases, and the people who do qualify as public figures wouldn’t have to provide much evidence that the journalist was acting maliciously or irresponsibly. The bill would also change who can be considered a “public figure” under the law. Actual malice is the term used to determine if a journalist knew what they were writing about a public figure was false or should have known it was false. ![]() It would redefine “actual malice” to make it easier to win a defamation suit against a journalist. The bill, HB 991, was introduced by Florida state Rep. Sullivan, but it appears the bill may be an effort to get the Supreme Court to reconsider that decision and, as former President Trump once put it, “open up” libel laws. The bill would seemingly violate a Supreme Court ruling that established these press protections, New York Times v. Ron DeSantis would make it easier to sue journalists for defamation, and press freedom advocates say such a change in the law would be extremely dangerous. A bill in Florida that’s supported by Gov. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |