|
 Thomas took aim at the unanimous ruling in the libel case known
as New York Times Co. v. Sullivan in an opinion he wrote
concurring with the court's decision to end a defamation suit
against Bill Cosby filed by a woman who said the comedian raped
her in 1974.
Thomas, one of the high court's most conservative justices, said
the 55-year-old decision was not rooted in the U.S.
Constitution. That ruling and subsequent ones extending it "were
policy-driven decisions masquerading as constitutional law,"
Thomas wrote, expressing views in harmony with President Donald
Trump, who often attacks the media and has advocated making it
easier to sue news organizations and publishers for defamation.
Thomas agreed with his fellow justices in refusing to consider
reviving a defamation lawsuit against Cosby by Kathrine McKee,
an actress and former Las Vegas showgirl who said the
entertainer falsely called her a liar after she accused him of
rape.
McKee was represented in the case by attorney Charles Harder,
who represented Trump in a defamation suit brought against the
president by adult film actress Stormy Daniels. Daniels has said
she had a sexual encounter with Trump in 2006, which he denies.
McKee had appealed a court ruling in Massachusetts that threw
out her lawsuit.
The New York Times v. Sullivan ruling has served as a safeguard
for media reporting on public figures.
Trump in January 2018 called current defamation laws "a sham and
a disgrace" following the publication of a book about the White
House by author Michael Wolff called "Fire and Fury: Inside the
Trump White House," which among other things questioned the
president's mental health.
The high court's 1964 ruling held that in order to win a libel
suit, the plaintiff must demonstrate that the offending
statement was made with "actual malice," meaning knowledge that
it was false or reckless disregard as to whether it was false.
The case involved a lawsuit against the New York Times, a
newspaper that Trump often criticizes for its coverage of him.
Thomas wrote that "we should carefully examine the original
meaning of the First and Fourteenth Amendments," referring to
the constitutional provisions protecting freedom of speech,
freedom of the press and the application of those rights to the
states.
"If the Constitution does not require public figures to satisfy
an actual-malice standard in state-law defamation suits, then
neither should we," Thomas wrote.
Thomas said defamation law was historically a matter for the
states, and should remain that way.
[to top of second column] |
"The states are perfectly capable of striking an acceptable balance
between encouraging robust public discourse and providing a
meaningful remedy for reputational harm," Thomas wrote.
None of the other eight justices joined Thomas in his opinion.
COSBY PRISON SENTENCE
Cosby, 81, was convicted in April 2018 of three counts of aggravated
indecent assault for the drugging and sexual assault of Andrea
Constand, a former Temple University administrator, in 2004. He was
sentenced last September to three to 10 years in prison.
The Supreme Court last October snubbed Cosby's appeal in another
defamation case, allowing a lawsuit by former model Janice Dickinson
to go forward against the entertainer best known for his starring
role in the 1980s hit television series "The Cosby Show."
McKee went public with her rape accusation in a 2014 interview with
the New York Daily News. She is one of more than 50 women who have
accused Cosby of sexual assault dating back to the 1960s by using
drugs to incapacitate them.
An attorney for Cosby then sent a letter to the newspaper,
suggesting McKee was a liar and calling her an unreliable source. In
the letter, Cosby's lawyer said McKee had admitted lying to get
hired as a showgirl.
McKee sued Cosby for defamation in 2015 in federal court in Boston,
saying the letter made false statements and harmed her reputation.
A trial judge in 2017 dismissed her claims, saying the lawsuit was
barred by the First Amendment guarantee of free speech. The
Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that ruling.
The appeals court said that by deliberately wading into the
controversy, McKee had become a public figure, requiring her to
prove Cosby acted with malice to win a defamation claim.
McKee told the justices that she "should not be victimized twice
over" by making it harder for her to prove defamation merely because
she went public as an alleged victim.
(Reporting by Andrew Chung. Additional reporting by Lawrence Hurley;
Editing by Will Dunham)
[© 2019 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2019 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content.
 |
