Opinion ID: 1190385
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading:  Verifiability of the statements.

Text: There are four statements in the article which appear more likely to be objectively capable of proof or disproof and about which we will say more below. They are that Dworkin is a lesbian; supporters of the antipornography ordinance asked her to stay away; she advocates bestiality, incest and sex with children; and she initiated a nuisance suit. The remainder of the statements in the article, however, are not capable of being proved by objective means as either false or true. The terms militant feminist, shit-squeezing sphincter, publicity-grab, foul-mouthed abrasive manhater, cry-baby, foaming-at-the-mouth, and censor are hopelessly vague, imprecise, indefinite and amorphous. These terms are loosely definable and subjectively interpreted in such a variety of contexts that they cannot support an action for defamation. Lacking a clear method of verification with which to evaluate a statement    the trier of fact may improperly tend to render a decision based upon approval or disapproval of the contents of the statement, its author, or its subject. Ollman, 750 F.2d at 981. See also Smolla, supra, § 6.12[5].