“Now the old libel law used to be (that) you're responsible, you say something false that harms somebody’s reputation, we don't care if it was told to you by nine bishops, you are liable,” Scalia continued. “New York Times v. Sullivan just cast that aside because the Court thought in modern society, it'd be a good idea if the press could say a lot of stuff about public figures without having to worry. And that may be correct, that may be right, but if it was right it should have been adopted by the people. It should have been debated in the New York Legislature and the New York Legislature could have said, ‘Yes, we're going to change our libel law.’ But the living constitutionalists on the Supreme Court, the Warren Court, simply decided, ‘Yes, it used to be that ... George Washington could sue somebody that libeled him, but we don’t think that's a good idea any more.’”
This is what Trump was talking about, he wasn't seeking anything new, just a return to what the founding fathers knew to be true.
You said...
“This is what Trump was talking about, he wasn’t seeking anything new, just a return to what the founding fathers knew to be true.”
No.
Trump was talking about opening libel laws because he doesn’t like reading or hearing negative press about him. It’s an intimidation tactic. The press has no right to libel. No one is arguing that. But who wants to fight a politician in court who has access to government agencies to bring down on them. How many times have politicians claimed bad press written about them is a lie? Well, what could end up happening, and the history or the Fairness Doctrine proves this, is a reporter may decide to not print something about a certain politician that may hurt their career but be true as the hassle wouldn’t be worth it. Even the threat of suing someone can force them to back down as the threat will be an intimidation tactic. And we’ve witnessed how Trump reacts to criticism.
It sounds great now. I mean, you’re not going to find too many sympathizers here for the MSM. But what happens when the same tactic is used against this site or Rush or Savage. Slippery slope and don’t forget the law of unintended consequences
That is correct and necessary. Without any brake the newspapers have degenerated into battering rams shaping and controlling the news and destroying lives with false reporting. The press are stealing freedom of choice from the American People by eliminating the sources of accurate information.
With every Freedom comes Responsibility. The press were given a higher level of freedom because it important that the American people get the facts and they have refused all of the responsibility for accuracy & objectivity. Britain manages to retain freedom of speech in the press while making them responsible for accuracy. America can do the same.
Even if Trump was able to appoint Justices to do what he wants regarding defamation, Trump would still lose every defamation case he’s been involved in since the truth is an absoute defense.
Trump’s number of wins in defamation cases = 0
Trump’s number of losses in defamation cases = All of them.