- Joined
- Jan 27, 2011
- Messages
- 39,166
- Reaction score
- 9,672
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Re: Sarah Palin sues New York Times for defamation
Specious argument as you do not say much of anything about other rights being infringed. Conclusion: your complaints in this instance are political, not constitutional in nature.
Government in this instance is doing no more and no less than judging the damage caused by one party to another. The bars for libel are high and for a public figure are higher yet. They are not interfering they are protecting a citizen. That's why we have courts.
Right, I get all that - it's obvious.
But if Palin sues and wins, it is "government interference" that allows her to do so - laws against slander/libel, and a court system that allows her to sue for damages, with the verdict imposed by the state, enforced if necessary by the state.
Hence, the libel laws imposed by government are acceptable only to the extent that they do not infringe on our freedom of speech and the press. The 1A sets the bounds of those laws, what they can prohibit and what they cannot.
Specious argument as you do not say much of anything about other rights being infringed. Conclusion: your complaints in this instance are political, not constitutional in nature.
Government in this instance is doing no more and no less than judging the damage caused by one party to another. The bars for libel are high and for a public figure are higher yet. They are not interfering they are protecting a citizen. That's why we have courts.