New York Times v Sullivan

New York Times v Sullivan

$1.25

Monday, March 9, 1964

Vol XCIII, No. 311

Court Membership

What's the case?

Who were the judges serving the case?

Chief Justice

Earl Warren

Associate Justices

Hugo Black · William O. Douglas

Tom C. Clark · John M. Harlan II

William J. Brennan, Jr. · Potter Stewart

Byron White · Arthur Goldberg

CASE 376 U.S. 254

Events surrounding the case

This case established the actual malice standard, which has to be met before press reports about public officials can be considered to be defamation and libel; and hence allowed free reporting of the civil rights campaigns in the southern United States. It is one of the key decisions supporting the freedom of the press.

New York Times Co. v. L.B. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case that established the actual malice standard, which has to be met before press reports about public officials can be considered to be defamation and libel; and hence allowed free reporting of the civil rights campaigns in the southern United States.

Parties of the Case

The New York Times Company

L.B. Sullivan

The New York Times carried a full-page advertisement titled "Heed Their Rising Voices", which solicited funds to defend Martin Luther King, Jr. against an Alabama perjury indictment. The advertisement described actions against civil rights protesters, some of them inaccurately, some of which involved the police force of Montgomery, Alabama.

Although the Montgomery Public Safety commissioner, L. B. Sullivan, was not named in the advertisement, the inaccurate criticism of actions by the police was considered defamatory to Sullivan as well, due to his duty to supervise the police department. Sullivan sent a request for a retraction. The Times did not print one. Sullivan filed a lawsuit a few days later.

"we ... are somewhat puzzled as to how you think the statements in any way reflect on you," "you might, if you desire, let us know in what respect you claim that the statements in the advertisement reflect on you".

-The New York Times

Voting Numbers

Testing the Constitution

Lower Court Decisions

What Constitutional amendment(s) does this case test?

Sullivan won $500,000 in an Alabama court judgment. The case then went on to the Supreme Court. All Supreme Court judges voted in favor of the New York Times.

The United States Supreme Court unanimously ruled in favor of the newspaper. The Court said the right to publish all statements is protected under the First Amendment. Mr. Justice Brennan delivered the opinion of the Court.

The First Amendment, as applied through the Fourteenth, protected a newspaper from being sued for libel in state court for making false defamatory statements about the official conduct of a public official, because the statements were not made with knowing or reckless disregard for the truth.

Dissenting Opinion

Expanding or Decreasing Rights?

Because the decision of the court was unanimous, there was no dissenting opinion. All judges were in agreement in favor of The New York Times.

This case strengthened the right of newspapers to say what they want as long as they do not contradict the Actual Malice Standard.

My Opinion

I personally side with the court's decision. The Constitution gives freedom of the press and if Sullivan's name wasn't clearly stated, I dont think he needed to throw a fit like a five year old.