CORAL RIDGE MINISTRIES MEDIA, INC., DBA D.JAMES KENNEDY MINISTRIES v. SOUTHERNPOVERTY LAW CENTER (Supreme Ct Decision issued 6/27/22)

Supreme Court ^ | 06/27/2022 | Supreme Court

[NJRighty]

The Southern Poverty Law Center is a hate group.

[NorthMountain]

Also a disgusting bunch of grifters.

[Zakeet]

Democrats Argue That Clarence Thomas Should Only Have 3/5 Of A Vote

[Truthsearcher]

I agree with the decision. I think SPLC can call anyone they want a hate group. Just like I can can the SPLC a hate group without worrying about being sued for dafamation.

The issue here is that Amazon chooses to let SPLC dictate their policies.

The solution is to boycott Amazon until they stop doing so, or use some other platform to garner donations.

[If You Want It Fixed - Fix It]

So if when the splc creates a Women Haters group of prolife churches or businesses....this will continue

[alancarp]

The ‘actual malice’ part should have been a slam dunk: what business of theirs was it from the SPLC to tell Amazon anything about Coral Ridge? When they go out of their way to slap a ‘hate group’ on them... that’s malice.

[Twotone]

A very bad decision. Everything the SPLC does is done with malice.

[viewfromthefrontier]

Again, Justice Thomas leads by dissent based on principled judicial reasoning not precedents.

I think this is an important point because many liberal arguments are based solely on "precedent." Pull that rug from under them and their weak position is exposed.

Thank you, Justice Thomas!

[moonhawk]

We care because the SPLC is allowed to get away with slander and cause actual (financial) harm to good people.

[usnavy_cop_retired]

IANAL but I think that Thomas will eventually get 3 other justices to agree to revisit Sullivan v NYT. He has convinced the court to go back to the history of the BOR’s and the 14th to determine what the founders believed at the time of the constitution writing/passing on other cases.The decision in Bruen, (NY gun case), made it clear that if the laws and traditional understanding/use at the time of the constitution/14th did not require or allow for there to be one set of rules for the average citizen for a constitutional right to exist vs a separate set of rules for other citizens that is more restrictive than the separate rules are unconstitutional. At the time of the founding no one was exempt from slander/libel/defamation suits because of the profession they were involved in, nor was anyone libeled/slandered/defamed required to prove anything other than a slander/libel/defamation had occurred, the slander/libel/defamation was false and they suffered “damages” because of it. Newspapers were frequently sued by average citizens, politicians and the famous of the time for slander/libel/defamation and some were held accountable.