Justice Thomas wants to revisit media defamation law

[Preacher]

Supreme Court Justice wants to revisit the way media covers celebrities

Excellent! I completely agree with him! Maybe this Covington/WashPo lawsuit will do just that!

 

[EvilCat Breath]

It's more than the way the media covers celebrities. The media now makes celebrities of those they want to malign.

Nick Sandmann was just a kid waiting for a bus. He did nothing to inject himself into the public eye. The media did that. Then having created a public figure the media claims to be able to attack him.

 

[bendog]

I think this has been on his agenda for awhile. LOL

 

[Dekster]

from the article: The States are perfectly capable of striking an acceptable balance between encouraging robust public discourse and providing a meaningful remedy for reputational harm,” Thomas opined Tuesday. “We should reconsider our jurisprudence in this area.”

I thought maybe he was serious until I read this. With technology what it is, it would be virtually unworkable to leave it up to individual states when communications cross state lines at light speed. It would a tar pit of conflicting laws.

 

[buckeye45_73]

from the article: The States are perfectly capable of striking an acceptable balance between encouraging robust public discourse and providing a meaningful remedy for reputational harm,” Thomas opined Tuesday. “We should reconsider our jurisprudence in this area.”

I thought maybe he was serious until I read this. With technology what it is, it would be virtually unworkable to leave it up to individual states when communications cross state lines at light speed. It would a tar pit of conflicting laws.

Well if its interstate then have a federal law, which most cases would be. Within a state should be state law

 

[Dekster]

from the article: The States are perfectly capable of striking an acceptable balance between encouraging robust public discourse and providing a meaningful remedy for reputational harm,” Thomas opined Tuesday. “We should reconsider our jurisprudence in this area.”

I thought maybe he was serious until I read this. With technology what it is, it would be virtually unworkable to leave it up to individual states when communications cross state lines at light speed. It would a tar pit of conflicting laws.

Well if its interstate then have a federal law, which most cases would be. Within a state should be state law

Thomas seems to be inclined of just letting states deal with it. Intrastate would be all but impossible when it comes to public figures and the ubiquitous way telecommunications gets treated as a medium to almost always bring federal law in play just by using a telephone or the internet.

 

[buckeye45_73]

from the article: The States are perfectly capable of striking an acceptable balance between encouraging robust public discourse and providing a meaningful remedy for reputational harm,” Thomas opined Tuesday. “We should reconsider our jurisprudence in this area.”

I thought maybe he was serious until I read this. With technology what it is, it would be virtually unworkable to leave it up to individual states when communications cross state lines at light speed. It would a tar pit of conflicting laws.

Well if its interstate then have a federal law, which most cases would be. Within a state should be state law

Thomas seems to be inclined of just letting states deal with it. Intrastate would be all but impossible when it comes to public figures and the ubiquitous way telecommunications gets treated as a medium to almost always bring federal law in play just by using a telephone or the internet.

interstate should be the feds, but the public figure thing needs to be revamped, it should be famous people, not some kid caught on a video

 

[Dekster]

from the article: The States are perfectly capable of striking an acceptable balance between encouraging robust public discourse and providing a meaningful remedy for reputational harm,” Thomas opined Tuesday. “We should reconsider our jurisprudence in this area.”

I thought maybe he was serious until I read this. With technology what it is, it would be virtually unworkable to leave it up to individual states when communications cross state lines at light speed. It would a tar pit of conflicting laws.

Well if its interstate then have a federal law, which most cases would be. Within a state should be state law

Thomas seems to be inclined of just letting states deal with it. Intrastate would be all but impossible when it comes to public figures and the ubiquitous way telecommunications gets treated as a medium to almost always bring federal law in play just by using a telephone or the internet.

interstate should be the feds, but the public figure thing needs to be revamped, it should be famous people, not some kid caught on a video

Revamped in what way? I mean it really could go either way if Thomas wants to put people on the same playing field. It could be that public figures are not fair game or it could be that everybody becomes fair game like public figures. How do you draw the line between "famous" and "infamous" when it comes to people entering the public arena? I mean the Covington Catholic kids, or at least the one in front of the Native American was just some kid, made it into the public political discourse, and did a televised interview? Was the Clerk who refused to issue gays marriage licenses "famous"? There were certainly a lot of politics surrounding her that would seem to suggest the first amendment was in play just as it would have been 200 years ago.

 

[deanrd]

Supreme Court Justice wants to revisit the way media covers celebrities

Excellent! I completely agree with him! Maybe this Covington/WashPo lawsuit will do just that!

Does that mean Barrack Obama will be able to sue Fox News?

 

[MAGAman]

from the article: The States are perfectly capable of striking an acceptable balance between encouraging robust public discourse and providing a meaningful remedy for reputational harm,” Thomas opined Tuesday. “We should reconsider our jurisprudence in this area.”

I thought maybe he was serious until I read this. With technology what it is, it would be virtually unworkable to leave it up to individual states when communications cross state lines at light speed. It would a tar pit of conflicting laws.

If you don't think it's serious you aren't serious.

The technology being available to spread and repeat a slander doesn't make the States incapable of having laws against slander.

 

[Dekster]

from the article: The States are perfectly capable of striking an acceptable balance between encouraging robust public discourse and providing a meaningful remedy for reputational harm,” Thomas opined Tuesday. “We should reconsider our jurisprudence in this area.”

I thought maybe he was serious until I read this. With technology what it is, it would be virtually unworkable to leave it up to individual states when communications cross state lines at light speed. It would a tar pit of conflicting laws.

If you don't think it's serious you aren't serious.

The technology being available to spread and repeat a slander doesn't make the States incapable of having laws against slander.

States can have laws about lots of things, but that does not make them workable, nor does it make the an appropriate alternative to federal court involvement, nor does it change that Justice Thomas is simply wrong.

 

[bodecea]

Supreme Court Justice wants to revisit the way media covers celebrities

Excellent! I completely agree with him! Maybe this Covington/WashPo lawsuit will do just that!

Thomas having an original thought with Scalia gone? Wow!

 

[EvilCat Breath]

California was forced to restrict the press a few years ago over the actions of overzealous paparazzi. The paps started following the children of celebrities and photographing them. The standard is now that children merely going about their private business cannot be photographed. Children are not celebrities and have not, merely by being born, injected themselves into the public interest.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

It's more than the way the media covers celebrities. The media now makes celebrities of those they want to malign.

Nick Sandmann was just a kid waiting for a bus. He did nothing to inject himself into the public eye. The media did that. Then having created a public figure the media claims to be able to attack him.

This is the truth. They will get ass fucked in the lawsuit. It's only a matter of how much they are going to pay.

 

[MAGAman]

States can have laws about lots of things, but that does not make them workable, nor does it make the an appropriate alternative to federal court involvement, nor does it change that Justice Thomas is simply wrong.

Give me your top reasons why states should not be able to protect their citizens from being slandered and having their reputation ruined by a hateful and dishonest media person.

 

[MAGAman]

It's more than the way the media covers celebrities. The media now makes celebrities of those they want to malign.

Nick Sandmann was just a kid waiting for a bus. He did nothing to inject himself into the public eye. The media did that. Then having created a public figure the media claims to be able to attack him.

This is the truth. They will get ass fucked in the lawsuit. It's only a matter of how much they are going to pay.

They should, but I doubt that they will.

 

[skews13]

Supreme Court Justice wants to revisit the way media covers celebrities

Excellent! I completely agree with him! Maybe this Covington/WashPo lawsuit will do just that!

Does that mean Barrack Obama will be able to sue Fox News?

Yep. And everybody that has ever been maligned by any rightwing talk radio clown.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

The press is up shitstain obama's ass farther than a rock of meth.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Supreme Court Justice wants to revisit the way media covers celebrities

Excellent! I completely agree with him! Maybe this Covington/WashPo lawsuit will do just that!

Does that mean Barrack Obama will be able to sue Fox News?

Yep. And everybody that has ever been maligned by any rightwing talk radio clown.

Not everybody. If a rightwing talk radio clown ever chose an ordinary citizen going about his own business to malign that clown should have to pay.

The leftist press uses itself as a different brand of the knockout game. Pick someone tending to their own concerns and knock them out. Then say by being knocked out by the press they have become public figures so it's okay to continue to hammer them.

 

[MAGAman]

Supreme Court Justice wants to revisit the way media covers celebrities

Excellent! I completely agree with him! Maybe this Covington/WashPo lawsuit will do just that!

Does that mean Barrack Obama will be able to sue Fox News?

Yep. And everybody that has ever been maligned by any rightwing talk radio clown.

Then you can give examples of a private citizen getting the Covington or Duke Lacrosse treatment by Right Wing Radio.