This is so ignorant in so many ways. The President seems to have no grasp of how laws work.
First, if the NY Times printed falsehoods detrimental to him, he could sue them now. Exactly how should that change? Does he want to be able to sue if they print detrimental TRUE things? Not in America. By uninterrupted precedent going back all the way to the Zenger case, the truth stands as an absolute defense against accusations of defamation.
Second, Congress makes laws, not the President. This sort of action can't be covered by an executive order.
Third, there are no Federal libel laws at all! Libel and slander cases are tried in state courts under the laws of the appropriate state.
3a) The President has no role in this process. The U.S. Supreme Court, however, can influence the states by striking down their laws. For example, the court ruled in 1964 that state libel laws must require the plaintiff to establish not only falsehood, but also malice and a reckless disregard for the truth on the part of the offending party if the plaintiff is a public figure. Justice Brennan wrote in the majority position that permissible statements “may well include vehement, caustic and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials.”
3b) Even if Congress chose to create a Federal libel law, it would be constrained by that same court decision. There are only two ways to change that: (1) another Supreme Court ruling which overrides it; (2) a constitutional amendment. Either of those routes would weaken the First Amendment, which is the very cornerstone of what makes America America, so good luck with that.
No comments:
Post a Comment