Document: 443 U.S. 111 99 S.Ct. 2675 61 L.Ed.2d 411 Ronald R. HUTCHINSON, Petitioner,v.William PROXMIRE and Morton Schwartz. No. 78-680. Argued April 17, 1979. Decided June 26, Syllabus Respondent United States Senator publicizes examples of wasteful governmental spending by awarding his "Golden Fleece the Month Award." One such award was given to federal agencies that had funded petitioner scientist's study emotional behavior in which he sought an objective measure aggression, concentrating upon patterns certain animals. The announced a speech prepared with help respondent legislative assistant, text incorporated widely distributed press release. Subsequently, also referred newsletters sent out Senator, television interview program on appeared, telephone calls made assistant sponsoring agencies. Petitioner sued respondents Federal District Court for defamation, alleging, inter alia, making publicizing it nationwide, damaged him professional academic standing. granted summary judgment respondents, holding Speech or Debate Clause afforded absolute immunity investigating funding petitioner's research, Senate, release, since fell within "informing function" Congress. court further held "public figure" purposes determining respondents' liability; were protected First Amendment thereby requiring prove "actual malice"; based depositions, affidavits, pleadings there no genuine issue material fact actual malice, neither failure investigate nor unfair editing summarizing being sufficient establish malice." Finally, even if found be "private person," relevant state law required respondents. Appeals affirmed, statements release that, although followup not Clause, they Amendment, figure," record showing Held: 1. While this Court's practice is avoid reaching constitutional questions dispositive nonconstitutional ground available, special considerations case mandate first resolved. If have under other need considered. And where appears would affirm state-law so appeal could decided without issue, will reached here. Pp. 122-123. 2. does protect transmittal information individual Members Congress releases newsletters. 123-133. (a) There nothing history its language suggesting any intent create privilege from liability suit defamatory outside Chambers; precedents support conclusion Member may liable republishing originally Chamber. 127-130. (b) Neither here "essential deliberation Senate" part deliberative process. Gravel v. States, 408 606, 92 2614, 33 583; Doe McMillan, 412 306, 93 2018, 36 912. P. 2685. (c) privileged as tell public about their activities. Individual Members' activities function deliberations make up process; contrast voting preparing committee reports, are Congress' inform itself, primarily means informing those forum represent views single Member. supra, distinguished. 132-133. 3. malice" standard proof New York Times Co. Sullivan, 376 254, 84 710, 11 686, applicable. local newspapers reported grants research access news media shown reports response announcement Golden Award, demonstrates figure prior controversy engendered award. His access, was, came after alleged libel limited responding Those charged defamation cannot, own conduct, defense makingthe claimant figure. Nor concern expenditures figure, at time having assumed role prominence broad question concern. 133-136. 7 Cir., 579 F.2d 1027, reversed remanded. Michael E. Cavanaugh, Okemos, Mich., petitioner. Alan Raywid, Washington, D. C., Mr. Chief Justice BURGER delivered opinion Court. 1 We certiorari, 436 1066, 832, 59 31 (1979), resolve three issues: (1) Whether Constitution, Art. I, § 6, against suits allegedly newsletters; (2) whether Hutchinson either official," applicable 686 (1964); (3) entitled judgment. 2 Hutchinson, behavioral scientist, William Proxmire, Schwartz, arising Proxmire's giving what called Fleece" "award" went sponsored Hutchinson's research. libeled him, damaging standing, interfered contractual relations. 1027. 3 reverse remand proceedings consistent opinion. 4 * Proxmire Wisconsin. In March 1975, initiated Award" publicize perceived most egregious spending. second award, National Science Foundation, Aeronautics Space Administration, Office Naval Research, almost half million dollars during preceding seven years fund research.1 5 At director Kalamazoo State Mental Hospital. Before similar position Ft. Custer Home. Both hospital home operated Michigan Department Health; therefore employee both positions. During period adjunct professor Western University. When department Hospital closed became Foundation Behavioral nonprofit organization. transferred foundation. 6 bulk devoted behavior. particular, animals, clenching jaws when exposed various aggravating stressful stimuli.2 Agency Navy interested potential resolving problems associated confining humans close quarters extended periods space undersea exploration. Award done seeking evidence spending, Schwartz read copies NASA. revealed received Health. learned After contacting number agencies, helped prepare present Senate 18, 1975; then into advance only addition introductory concluding sentences. Copies mailing list 275 members throughout abroad. 8 telephoned before releasing award; protested contained inaccurate incomplete replied thought fair. 9 speech, described following comment:3 10 "The nonsense makes me angry enough scream kick clench my jaw. It seems outrageous. "Dr. studies should taxpayers well monkeys grind teeth. fact, good doctor has fortune process monkey American taxpayer. 12 "It Government get 'monkey business.' view transparent worthlessness jaw-grinding biting hard-drinking monkeys, we put stop bite bureaucrats who been taking taxpayer." 121 Cong.Rec. 10803 (1975). 13 May Awards newsletter 100,000 people whose names included constituents Wisconsin persons states. repeated essence Later appeared though did mention name.4 14 final reference February 1976. letter, summarized 1975. letter name, but report: 15 "—The NSF, Agency, Research won 'Golden Fleece' jointly $500,000 determine why jaws. 16 17 "All dropped. No more business." App. 168-171. 18 announced, acting behalf contacted deposition stated attempt dissuade them continuing merely discussed subject.5 contrast, contends these intended persuade terminate contracts. II 19 On 16, 1976, filed Wisconsin.6 Count I alleges result actions "suffered loss respect profession, suffered injury feelings, humiliated, scorn, extreme mental anguish physical illness pain person. Further, income ability earn future." conduct relationships supporters He later amended complaint add allegation rights privacy peace tranquility infringed. 20 Respondents moved change venue motion asserted all acts utterances Clause. addition, criticism funds Free Amendment. They argued official, obliged existence contended facts finding malice. 21 Without ruling venue, 431 F.Supp. 1311 (W.D.Wis.1977). ruling, relied grounds urged reasoned covering speech. concluded investigations clearly ambit said because To conclusion, cases interpreting franking statute. See 39 U.S.C. 3210. 22 Although privilege, base concerning analogies. Instead, "press sense, different than radio broadcast floor."7 F.Supp., 1325. That rely clear implicit protected. 23 turned explain grant claims interviews. liability: 24 "Given Dr. long involvement publicly-funded active solicitation grants, coverage interest expenditure precise voluntarily participated, concludes purpose suit. As acknowledged deposition, 'Certainly, matter interest.' " Id., 1327.8 25 Having evaluate claim acted issue. affidavits depositions indicate ever entertained doubt truth statements. Relying courts, plaintiff adequate malice," might rule rather exception. 1330.9 concluded: 26 "But private person protections do extend [respondents], dictates judgment." Ibid. 27 controlling Columbia. deciding govern Wisconsin's choice-of-law principles, able recover jurisdiction. 28 1027 (CA7 1978). interpreted 912 (1973), recognizing protection distribution exceed purposes. 1033. Clause; were, however, Amendment.10 record, figure." 1034-1035. examined agreed "that, [respondents] knowledge probable 'falsity' statements." 1035. rejected argument erred granting claimed wrongs defamation—interference relations, intentional infliction anguish, invasion privacy: 29 "We additional allegations harm results defendants. falsehoods themselves privileged, defeat allow recovery specified damages caused." 1036 (footnote omitted).11 30 review justified III petition certiorari raises questions. involves scope another claims; third concerns appropriateness judgment, embracing arose solicitude hospitable judicial attitude toward case. n. 9, supra. law, recover. 32 Our available. See, e. g., Siler Louisville & Nashville Co., 213 175, 193, 451, 455, 53 L.Ed. 753 (1909). Were follow course consider. correctly question, resolution unnecessary. conclude, "not consequences litigation's burden defending themselves." Dombrowski Eastland, 387 82, 85, 87 1425, 1427, 577 (1967). Eastland Servicemen's Fund, 421 491, 503, 95 1813, 1821, 44 324 considered questioned Place." 34 Ordinarily, consideration end question. consider law. Here, indication holding. surmise because, explaining stated: "[T]he intimating personal 'perhaps duplicative' falsehoods." F.2d, 1035 15. light surmise, Wolston Reader's Digest, Inc., 157, 161 2, 2701, 2704 450, appropriate here: assume familiar general principle issues statutory treated issues. . interpret footnote case, jurisdiction diversity citizenship, question." necessity so, reach IV 35 historical precedent present-day congressional practices. contend impetus our Constitution parliamentary efforts right criticize Crown prosecution Speaker House Commons publication report Parliament. modern day very little debate occurs floor House; argue necessary communicate Members. For example, testified: "I often statement something Congressional Record misses attention virtually House, don't Record. handed something, going call .." App., 220. 37 essential duties constituents, Members, 38 directly passed relatively few times 190 years. supra; (1973); 583 (1972); Brewster, 501, 2531, 507 Johnson, 383 169, 86 749, 681 (1966); Kilbourn Thompson, 103 168, 377 (1881). Literal reading would, course, confine narrowly "Speech House." But practical strictly literal limit four walls Thus, hearings protected, Cf. Coffin Coffin, Mass. *1, *27-*28 (1808). gloss beyond not, departed protecting Thomas Jefferson's view: 40 "[The privilege] restrained things Parliamentary [the Member] contra morem parliamentarium, bounds limits place duty." T. Jefferson, A Manual Practice (1854), reprinted Complete Jefferson 704 (S. Padover ed. 1943). 41 draftsmen James Wilson, expressed lectures between 1790 1792 while Blackstone's statement, W. Blackstone, Commentaries 164, Parliament's privileges preserved keeping indefinite: 42 "Very regard legislature .. great maxims, parliament founded, defined ascertained constitutions. arcana prerogative, equally unknown system jurisprudence." J. Works (J. Andrews 1896).12 43 respect, Wilson underscoring Constitution—inter provide written definitions powers, privileges, immunities evolving concepts identified diverse sources English Like thoughts Joseph Story, writing edition 1833: confined proceedings, cover 863, 329. 45 *34. 46 roots back struggle Tudor Stuart monarchs criminal civil processes employed authority intimidate legislators. Yet cautioned 47 "must experience, context scheme government system. [T]heir Parliament supreme authority, coordinate branch. designed preserve independence, supremacy." U.S., 508, S.Ct., 2535. 48 Nearly century ago, 204, "to generally session one relation business it." (Emphasis added.) More recently definition Clause: 49 "Legislative all-encompassing. heart House. Insofar construed matters, must integral communicative participate passage rejection proposed legislation matters places it, courts pure 'only prevent indirect impairment deliberations.' States,, 625, 2627 (quoting Doe, 455 753, 760 (CA1 1972)) (emphasis added). 50 313-314, 317, 2025, 2027; 512, 515-516, 517-518, 2537, 2538-2539, 2540; Long Ansell, 293 76, 55 21, 22, 79 208 (1934). 51 Whatever imprecision term "legislative activities," explicit suggests intention 507, 2535, observed: 52 simply benefit Congress, integrity insuring independence legislators." Claims needed closely scrutinized. Brewster took note this: 54 authors aware abuses flow two sweeping safeguards. order values, wrote tolerates protects tolerated citizens, shield process." 517, 2540 Indeed, abundantly perceive basis departing long-established rule. 56 Story Commentaries, explained republication Congress: 57 "Therefore, house commons member cannot respecting elsewhere; yet, publishes contains libellous matter, action therefor, common libel. same principles seem congress. man ought defame others colour performance office. discharge congress, furnishes reason, enabled through medium destroy reputation, invade repose citizens. duty, furtherance rights, policy. Every citizen laws malignant scandal, false charges, imputations, congress utter seat."13 p. 329 (1833) 58 L. Cushing, Elements Law Legislative Assemblies America ¶ 604, 244 (1st reprint 1971). drafted, recalling succeeded secure freedom debate. libelous remarks King Lord Abingdon, Esp. 225, 170 Eng.Rep. 337 (N.P.1794), Kenyon Abingdon's Lords: 60 "[A]s words spoken Lords, walls, [the] Lordship them, answer offence; offence sanction, expense: certainly publish vehicle slander individual; 228, Eng.Rep., 338. Creevey, M. S. 273, 105 102 (K.B.1813). 62 622-626, 2625-2628, recognized doctrine denying accepted States: 63 "[P]rivate way Senate; questioning threaten impermissibly exposing executive influence." 2627. 64 reaffirmed 314-315, 2025-2026: 65 "A impunity speaker's stand district, act official report. reason circumstances 'by proceedings.' (Footnote omitted; quoting 2627.)14 66 wholly immune available 67 Respondents, functioning assert, significant impact Senators. Member's published exert some influence votes relationship expansive 68 known, engage many purely These include so-called 'news letters' releases, speeches Congress." 69 (1966), carefully distinguished "related due process," constitutes 70 "In stating [Johnson's attempts Justice] 'in wise related process' covered sense imply corollary everything 'related' office shielded Quite contrary Johnson held, citing enacting 71 72 relating 73 74 ". narrowest scope, large, albeit essential, privilege. reckless men [by debate] impunity, conscious choice Framers. 513-516, 2538-2539. original.) 75 unable discern "conscious choice" scattered far wide mail, press, electronic media. 76 Advocates sometimes tend confuse uses "informing." informs itself collectively committees. Woodrow used "informing" quoted reality, Wilson's learn Executive Branch administrative agencies; wide-ranging inquiries subjects choice. Moreover, implies distinction function: 77 "Unless use every acquainting disposition agents government, country helpless how served; unless scrutinize sift form discussion, remain embarrassing, crippling ignorance affairs important understand direct. preferred function. [T]he really self-governing discusses interrogates administration." 303 (1885). 78 narrower Wilsonian previous term, perceives duty Valuable desirable terms, process.15 result, 80 contrary. dealt committees, Voting collective expressions such, Newsletters forum; disparage value importance hold V 81 Since (1964),16 define accommodation assure vigorous affording reputations individuals. Time, Inc. Firestone, 424 448, 96 958, 154 (1976); Gertz Robert Welch, 418 323, 94 2997, 789 (1974); Rosenbloom Metromedia, 403 29, 91 1811, 296 (1971); St. Amant 390 727, 88 1323, 262 (1968); Curtis Publishing Butts, 388 130, 1094 (1967); Rosenblatt Baer, 75, 669, 597 (1966). offered figures": 82 "For attain status [of figure] roles especial society. Some occupy positions persuasive power deemed figures commonly, classed thrust forefront particular controversies involved. event, invite comment." 345, 3009. 83 attained correct comment receipt projects. factors: first, successful application grants; second, media, demonstrated wire services Award. factors Award; profile much like countless profession. writings small category professionals concerned human extent subject controversy, consequence Clearly, Digest Assn., 167-168, 2708, 450. 85 himself others. controversy; most, point expenditures. shared relates expenditures; everyone benefited myriad classified figure—a opinions rejected. "use subject-matter classifications too improper balance competing interests area." 456, 966. applications publications journals can invited degree meet level. books articles legal issues; community affairs. Nevertheless, agree regular accouterments become 89 Reversed 90 STEWART joins communication Congressman staff agency depends defamatory. Because officials routine oversight function, believes activity BRENNAN, dissenting. disagree fall speech-or-debate immunity. view, legislators unnecessary expenditures, whatever form, below reasons dissent 648, 2637, (1972). disagreement over total. total "over $500,000." preparation trial, sides higher estimates amount. Reports scientific journals. unlike primates less technical periodicals Geographic. Fossey, Years Mountain Gorillas, 140 Geographic 574 Galdikas-Brindamour, Orangutans, Indonesia's "People Forest," 148 444 (1975); Goodall, Life Death Gombe, 155 592 (1979); My Among Wild Chimpanzees, 124 272 (1963); Strum, With "Pumphouse Gang": Insights Baboon Behavior, 147 672 actually floor. inserted 220-221. uncertainty, arises nondelivered printed This never seemed think important. assume, deciding, carries parties least show. appearances television. suggested produced suggestion. recall Resolution 543, 94th Cong., 2d Sess. (1976), authorized give testimony. 122 29876 (1976). 13, requesting retract erroneous 1975 Of see 3, assurance official." 1327-1328. decide correct. express provided boundaries official"; employees, however. Considering nuances raised here, constrained "rule." defendant's mind (1964), readily lend disposition. C. Wright A. Miller, Procedure 2730, pp. 590-592 (1973). Herbert Lando, 441 153, 1635, 115 (1979). posture propriety dealing complex us. cross petition; interviews Proxmire. infra, rpAe

Category: 2