Freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism.
Isn't there an amendment to the constitution that says something about freedom of speech, the press and media have these rights too, should she have stripped that law down to bare bones and ruled against NBC?Judge Nelson has proved she should not be on the bench over and over again.
If you do not realize it, you can say what ever you want. That is freedom of speech. But there are still laws that cover libel, such as alleged in this case, and slander.Isn't there an amendment to the constitution that says something about freedom of speech, the press and media have these rights too, should she have stripped that law down to bare bones and ruled against NBC?
The first Amendment doesn't cover you against libel.
And the reason her ruling is being appealed.
"The law is reason, free from passion."
If people in the media voice their opinion, that's freedom of speech and whether you agree with that opinion or not, it's protected. This isn't an issue of what NBC said or believed about Zimmerman, this was a case where they edited a recording of a phone call to police by Zimmerman (who had just shot a black teenage boy) which by doing so took him out of context and falsely gave millions of people the impression he was a racist.
In other words, what NBC did was falsely give millions of people the impression that Zimmerman implicated himself as a racist after killing a black kid. Or put another way, thanks to NBC, millions of people saw Zimmerman as a self confessed racist who murdered a black kid, who had not been arrested and was living his life free as a bird. He received numerous death threats because of this, it put both him and his family in a lot of danger, and forced them to have to go into hiding.
Don't you believe that NBC should be held responsible for their actions?