![handle is hein.journals/gemslw30 and id is 1 raw text is:
New York Times v. Sullivan : Perspectives from History
Samantha Barbas*
Sarah Palin's loss in her libel suit in federal district court against the
New York Times on February 14, 2022, over an inaccurate 2017 editorial
linking her political action committee to a mass shooting,' could result in
a challenge to the most significant First Amendment ruling in history.
Palin has appealed to the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, with
the likely intention of getting the case before the U.S. Supreme Court.' She
is challenging New York Times v. Sullivan,, the landmark 1964 ruling in
which the Court for the first time applied the First Amendment to libel
law and held that public officials must show actual malice or reckless
disregard of the truth in order to win a libel suit.4 Sullivan and subsequent
cases made it significantly more difficult for public officials and public
figures to win libel suits against the press., They freed the press and other
speakers from the threat to free expression posed by strict libel laws.
Palin's lawsuit is part of a growing movement to engineer the
overruling of Sullivan. That movement has been going strong for at least
six years now. Donald Trump, as candidate and president, announced his
desire to eliminate Sullivan to make it easier to sue his liberal enemies in
the press.6 Trump's pronouncements, not to mention his many libel suits
against the press, inspired further attacks on Sullivan.7 Criticism of
Sullivan has come not only from conservative politicians and pundits, but
University at Buffalo School of Law (sbarbas@buffalo.edu).
Jeremy W. Peters, Sarah Palm's Libel Claim Against the Times IsRejected bya Jury, N.Y. TIMES
(Feb. 15, 2022), https://perma.cc/SWT4-CV5L.
2 CE Brief of Appellant at 32-36, Palin v. N.Y. Times Co., 940 F.3d 804 (2022) (No. 22-558)
(arguing the press has become virtually impervious to liability for defamation despite the Supreme
Court's counsel against a 'blind application' of the [actual-malice] rule (quoting Curtis Pub. Co. v.
Butts, 388 U.S. 130, 148 (1967)).
3 376 U.S. 254 (1964).
4 Brief of Appellant, supra note 2, at 32-34; see also Sullivan, 376 U.S. at 279-80.
5 See Curtis Publ'g Co. v. Butts, 388 U.S. 130,148,153-54 (1967); Associated Press v. Walker, 389
U.S. 28, 28 (1967) (per curiam); Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., 418 U.S. 323,342-43,352 (1974).
6 Michael M. Grynbaum, Trump Renews Pledge to Take a Strong Look' at Libel Laws, N.Y.
TIMES (Jan. 10, 2018), https://perma.cc/HF4Q-PCUE.
7 See, e.g., Mike Leonard, Covington Catholic Defamation Suits to Hit NY Times, CBS, Others,
BLOOMBERG L. (Feb. 24, 2020, 6:30 PM), https://perma.cc/TRZ2-33SC.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/gemslw30&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most