Document: 383 U.S. 75 86 S.Ct. 669 15 L.Ed.2d 597 Alfred D. ROSENBLATT, Petitioner,v.Frank P. BAER. No. 38. Argued Oct. 20, 1965. Decided Feb. 21, 1966. [Syllabus from pages 75-76 intentionally omitted] Arthur H. Nighswander, Laconia, N.H., for petitioner. Stanley M. Brown, Manchester, respondent. Mr. Justice BRENNAN delivered the opinion of Court. 1 A jury in New Hampshire Superior Court awarded respondent damages this civil libel action based on one petitioner's columns Laconia Evening Citizen. Respondent alleged that column contained defamatory falsehoods concerning his performance as Supervisor Belknap County Recreation Area, a facility owned and operated by County. In interval between trial decision appeal Supreme Court, we decided York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 254, 84 710, 11 686. We there held consistent with First Fourteenth Amendments State cannot award to public official falsehood relating conduct unless proves actual malice—that was published knowledge its falsity or reckless disregard whether it true false. The affirmed award, finding no bar. 106 N.H. 26, 203 A.2d 773. granted certiorari requested parties brief argue, addition questions presented petition certiorari, question 'public official' under our Garrison Louisiana, 379 64, 85 209, 13 125; 380 941, 1023, 961. 2 Area used principally ski resort but also other recreational activities. employed directly responsible Commissioners, three elected officials charge county government. During 1950's, controversy developed over way Commissioners Area; some protested had not Area's full potential, either local residents tourist attraction might contribute county's taxes. discussion culminated 1959, when Legislature enacted law transferring control special five-man commission.1 At least part give new regime fresh start, discharged. 3 Petitioner regularly contributed an unpaid he frequently commented political matters. As outspoken proponent change operations at views were often sharply stated, indicated disagreement actions taken Commissioners. January 1960, during first season management, six months after respondent's discharge, petitiioner alleges libeled him. relevant part, reads: 4 'Been doing little listening checking am thunderstruck what learning. 5 'This year, year without snow till very late, actually few major changes procedure; difference cash income simply fantastic, almost unbelievable. 6 'On any sort comparative basis, is literally hundreds per cent BETTER than last year. 7 'When consider excellent started because more snow, earlier can only ponder following question: 8 'What happened all money year? every What magic has Dana Beane (Chairman commission) rest commission, Warner (respondent's replacement Supervisor) wrought make such tremendous net results?' I. 9 face contains clearly actionable statement. Although year?' could be read imply peculation, they read, context, merely praise present administration. persons mentioned name are regime; reference made respondent, commissioners, anyone else who administration tenure. Persons familiar well complimenting luck skill management attracting increased patronage producing 'tremendous results' despite less favorable snow; indeed, witnesses petitioner testified so column. 10 offered extrinsic proofs supply meaning. These greatly exaggerated improvement regime, large community understood say asserted improvements explicable anything done. Rather, testified, imputing mismanagement peculation urged two theories support recovery imputation. II. him if found cast suspicion indiscriminately small number composed former group, imputation misconduct specifically him.2 This theory open law; judge explicitly instructed 'an impropriety crime group upon actionable.'3 presented, however, precluded holding that, absence sufficient evidence attack focused plaintiff, otherwise impersonal governmental utilized establish those administering operations. U.S., 290—292, S.Ct., 731. 12 plaintiff City Montgomery, Alabama. His duties included supervision police department. statements advertisement which relied referring 'truckloads * ringed Alabama College Campus' demonstration Capitol steps, Dr. Martin Luther King been 'arrested seven times.' false although 'deployed near campus,' 'ringed' gone connection demonstration, arrested four times. Sullivan Police Commissioner supervisory head Department constitutionally insufficient show about activity 'of concerning' him; rejected inconsistent proposition followed case '(i)n measuring deficiencies groups, criticism usually attached complete body,' 273 Ala. 656, 674—675, 144 So.2d 25, 39. To allow connect presumption alone was, view, invite spectre prosecutions government, Constitution does tolerate form. 273—276, 722, 731.4 'that may operations.' 292, 732. There must showing directed plaintiff. Were statement issue explicit Baer entire corrupt, assume deciding member identified recover.5 itself each individual. Even implicit, here, referred him, would defense suit identifiable engaged another attacked. situations distinguishable case; permitted infer both content challenged itself, government activity. extent authorized regard implication hold instruction erroneous.6 Here, made; assault previous appears. acting organ whom implicated, tinged suspicion. effect, find liability basis relationship agency, subject discussion. It plain members have barred Times. They required specific reference. Whether official, bears same burden.7 indiscriminate operation tantamount demand therefore insufficient. Since judge's instructions erroneous respect, judgment reversed. III. 14 Respondent's second theory, supported testimony several witnesses, 'man charge' personally financial affairs. accepting reading, manifestly discusses government.8 matter interest, where publication addressed primarily interested community, fact irrelevant. squarely designation applies. If does, clear improper. Under instructions, negligent misstatement defeat privilege. That test Garrison, 79, 218, said, 'The laid down keyed ordinary care; defeasance privilege conditioned, mere negligence, truth.' court charged '(d)efamatory constitutes comment rather justified malice represented fair matters interest,' defined include 'ill will, evil motive, intention injure. *' definition affairs concerned; '(w)e held, allowed remedy establishes utterance true.' 74, 215. 16 Turning, then, within reject outset suggestion should answered state-law standards. States definitions administrative purposes, purposes national constitutional protection.9 existing standards reflect Times, best accidental. Our moreover, draws force protections afforded free expression. set scope principles 'the limits expression Nation vary state lines.' Pennekamp Florida, 328 331, 335, 66 1029, 1031, 90 L.Ed. 1295.10 17 remarked occasion 'to determine how far into lower ranks employees extend rule, specify categories included.' 283, n. 23, 727. No precise lines need drawn case. motivating twofold. expressed 'a profound commitment principle debate uninhibited, robust, wide-open, (such debate) vehement, caustic, sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks officials.' 270, 721. (Emphasis supplied.) is, first, strong interest issues, and, second, position significantly influence resolution issues. Criticism center protected area free, lest penalized. clear, therefore, applies among hierarchy have, appear substantial responsibility affairs.11 18 conclusion ignore important social values underlie defamation. Society pervasive preventing redressing reputation. But cases like present, tension nurtured Amendments. thrust interests particularly strong, case, Where apparent importance independent qualifications person holds it, beyond general employees, elements present12 apply.13 19 framed position. went trial, presentation shaped issue. He did, seek article role prominent regarded man operations, chargeable failures credited successes. Thus, prove showed rule; showing, least, raises argument official.'14 20 record leaves possibility adduced bring claim outside rule. Moreover, even falls suggests able defined. Because here before concluded foreclose attempting retrial action. remark generally instance official.'15 21 reversed remanded further proceedings opinion. 22 ordered. 23 Reversed remanded. 24 CLARK concurs result. 25 DOUGLAS, concurring. 26 686, dealt officials.1 now go. 27 problems considerable ones. Maybe key night watchman thefts secrets. Those us alive 1940's 1950's witnessed dreadful orderal people service being pummelled inside charges false, abusive, damaging extreme. Many them, unlike ran election, rarely opportunity rejoinder. 28 Yet issues guide, I see draw exclude watchman, file clerk, typist, or, matter, payroll. And contract carry out missions? Some them much domain socalled officeholder. dollar-a-year man, whose prototype publicized United Mississippi Valley Generating Co., 364 520, 81 294, 268?2 industrialists raise price basic commodity? Are steel aluminum domain? labor leader combines trade unionism bribery racketeering? Surely collective bargaining puts arena concerned.3 29 Thornhill Alabama, 310 88, 101 102, 60 736, 744, 1093, put follows: 30 freedom speech press guaranteed embraces liberty discuss publicly truthfully concern restraint fear subsequent punishment. exigencies colonial period efforts secure oppressive adminstration broadened conception these liberties adequate information education respect significant Freedom discussion, fulfill historic function nation, embrace needed appropriate enable society cope their period.' 31 term term, stuck content. own; long fashioning rule relate who, Court's standard, deemed office. 32 final analysis Due Process Clause Amendment displaced laws States. do suppose thought terms time adopted. frozen particular moment time. indeed until 1931 applicable reason (Stromberg People California, 283 359, 368—369, 51 532, 535, 117)—New application extension principle. since guideline, place system, comes issues? why restricted larger levels science, humanities, professions, agriculture, like? 33 my view bar Congress passing law, Alien Sedition Act (1 Stat. 596) contrary notwithstanding. think due process applied watered-down federal version respects guarantees Bill Rights incorporated Amendment. See e.g., Roth States, 354 476, 501, 77 1304, 1317, 1498 (separate opinion); Beauharnais Illinois, 343 250, 287, 72 725, 746, 96 919 (dissenting opinion). minority majority maintaining difference. right assuming pass then issue, involved.4 34 me different posture discussed prefer dismiss writ improvidently granted.5 facilitate work,6 join Part II opinion, BLACK'S separate concur judgment. 35 STEWART, 36 defamation laws, criminal, converted against seditious libel. decisions turned fundamental proposition.1 says today seems fully consonant decisions, 37 fallacy, guidepost laws. not. says, 'important reputation.' 38 protection own reputation unjustified invasion wrongful hurt reflects concept essential dignity worth human being—a root decent system ordered liberty. private personality, life left individual Ninth Tenth mean entitled recognition system. 39 use misleading euphemisms speak involving 'uninhibited, wideopen' debate, 'vehement, sharp' criticism.2 ultimately protects falsehood. gross untruth, deprives defamed hope legal redress proof lie knowing one, uttered truth. 40 except State's unconstitutionally libel.3 stripped citizens means injuries inflicted careless liars.4 destruction sure, capacity redeem. Yet, imperfect though vindication gives falsely dishonored. 41 preventive effect serves purpose. For rights personality transcend personal interests. taught anything, poisonous atmosphere easy infect degrade whole society. 42 BLACK, DOUGLAS joins, concurring dissenting. 43 managed recreation County, Hampshire. Rosenblatt, columnist newspaper, criticizing past center. implied dishonest manipulations handling finances Charging sued Rosenblatt obtained verdict $31,500 affirmed. relying 710 reverses remands conditions will Rosenblatt. reversal dissent leaving believing reasons stated opinions Douglas myself forbidden 44 discussing agent job, kind adopted protect. libelous public's take care business paid public. Unconditional criticize functions performed necessarily activities safely, not, depend arbitrarily labeled official.' Nor high occupy. Indeed percentage moneys expended distributed agents funds did. faithful Amendment's guarantees, critics judgments just freed pains penalties 45 illustrates short inadequate step took guard grave dangers created actions. Half-million-dollar stopped requirements 'malice' found, however Such requirement emotions deep prejudices pervade communities suits tried. limit press-destroying reviewing evidence, findings, rulings case-by-case basis. sure protect threats recognize abridgments courts repeat said 'An unconditional pleases minimum guarantee Amendment.' 46 Finally, sent back follow, add thought. indicates 'in instance' decide Statements growing words soon forgotten. When happens Federal forbids let juries essentially cases. After fight England Fox's Libel 1792 passed provided judges facts heralded lovers victory freedom. approved country 1735 John Peter Zenger prosecuted highly York. Chief Province got rid lawyers dared defend disbarring them. lawyer finally defended Zenger, Andrew Hamilton, won imperishable fame boldness telling they, judge, defendant guilty. acquitted. How.St.Tr. 675. practice denying granting power guilt wrote constitutions provisions regret single direction determination Compare Jackson Denno, 378 368, 1774, 908. 47 HARLAN, dissenting part. 48 agree II, section court's characterized depending 'theory' 'impersonal' libel, impermissible 710. 49 establishing standard governing officials, examine 'it incapable supporting jury's allegedly respondent.' 288, 730. question, terms, attributed suit, Public Affairs, pressed instead 'solely unsupported assumption position,' indicating involved misconduct. 289, groups police), 39, Commissioner. 50 setting aside noted 'disquieting implications conduct,' 291, 732, transmuted cause embodied forbade permitting operations' salutary applied, believe incorrectly, face, viz., area. However, rhetorical accusing culpable mismanagement. Hampshire, permissible reading newspaper article. 52 did leave convert 'personal' interpreted accusation libeled, libeled.* conventional tort law. '(I)f enough numerically sufficiently geographically reasonably intended recovery.' Harper & James, Torts § 5, 7, 367 (1956). Prosser, 106, 767—768 (1964); Riesman, Democracy Defamation: Control Group Libel, Col.L.Rev. 727, 759—760 (1942). Restatement 564, Comment c (1938), includes aspect language similar case: 53 size class indicate school board city council corrupt definite constitute thereof. If, disparaged circumstances point defamed. ministers liars minister surrounding intended.' 54 formulation scarcely too indefinite, successfully years numerous See, Gross Cantor, 270 N.Y. 93, 200 N.E. 592; cited supra, 5.7, 367; 767 768. eminently sound one. 55 hand, agreed—apart course public-official apply event—that wrongdoing Baer, good fail finds along Baer. concerned running enterprise, police' discharge duties. manifest instructing 'small group,' allowing transform action, traditional doctrine understand meaning 'A thief' become absolutely privileged 'A, B, C, D thieves.' 56 Without receding ruling heads branch agency involved, 57 FORTAS, 58 vacate granted. below occurred result, factual light announced Particularly type observe records. serve guide help measure outlines reality. Especially furnishes Procrustean bed think, insist record. conceivably late assistance us. N.H.Laws c. 399. purports compare unnamed prior group—a manager commissioners well. Lewis, Individual Member's Right Recover Defamation Leveled Group, U.Miami L.Rev. 519, 523—525 (1963). Kalven, Case: Note Central Meaning Amendment,' 1964 Sup.Ct.Rev. 191, 207 210. would, course, argued aimed others. objectionable; suggest group. limited. told: casts actionable. *; burden defamation, you group.' latitude apparently thus broad. Gilberg Goffi, A.D.2d 517, 251 N.Y.S.2d 823 (1964), aff'd, N.Y.2d 260 29, N.E.2d 620 (1965); Comment, 114 U.Pa.L.Rev. 241 (1965). recognized jury: 'You entitled, informed difficulties discrepancies thievery It's domain. property. Keep mind know conducted *.' Opinion Justices, 73 621, 62 A. 969, L.R.A., N.S., 415 (1906). reasons, references 282, 215, Barr Matteo, 360 79 1335, 1434, tied retaliation, determined serves. Pedrick, Press Law Libel: Modern Revised Translation, Cornell L.Q. 581, 590 591 (1964). Compare, Clancy Daily News Corp., 202 Minn. 1, 277 N.W. 264 (1938); Tanzer Crowley Publishing 240 App.Div. 203, 268 N.Y.S. (1934); Poleski Polish Am. 254 Mich. 15, 235 841 (1931); 5.26, pp. 449—450 (1956); 110, p. 815 (3d ed. 1964); Noel, Officers Candidates, 875, 896—897, 901—902 (1949); 113 284, 288 Note, Vand.L.Rev. 1429, 1445 treating element position, briefed. intimate whatever bases applying standards—for example, relatively insubstantial, himself vortex pressing concern. Cf. Salinger Cowles, 195 Iowa 873, 889, 191 167, 173—174 (1922); Peck Coos Bay 122 Or. 408, 420—421, 259 307, 311—312 (1927); Coleman MacLennan, 78 Kan. 711, 723—724, 98 281, 285—286, 361 (1908); Pauling Syndicate 335 F.2d 659, 671 (C.A.2d Cir. 1964). suggested accused stealing reached employ catches interest; virtually society's protecting employee's scrutiny entirely apart scruting occasioned controversy. seriously contended, be, longer supervised appeared decisional significance here. removed authority manner responsibilities necessary justify still lively propositions abroad, done task continued strong. comment, duty employee. 5.29 1964), Restatement, 619. lessen cloak punish unpopular ideas speakers, assure appellate findings review decisions. Speiser Randall, 357 513, 525, 1332, 1341, 1460; 285, S.St. 728. cf. Farmers Education Co-op Union, etc. WDAY, 1302, 1407, radio station liable broadcast 315(a) Communications 1934 candidate received compensation Government, given $10 day lieu subsistence, plus transportation expenses. 533, 300. Linn Plant Guard Workers, 53, 657 extended, via path preemption, field relations. 'most absolute construction Amendment, states Fourteenth, permit line spurious common genuine character.' Brant, Rights: Its Origin 502—503 ipse dixit overlooks which, defining outer limits, both. 125. complaint conformity existed amended conform wholly N.H.Rev.Stat.Ann. 514:9 (1955). 526:1 sense ascertainable oath So know, hybrid nature contractor. oral briefs profoundly stirred litigation. Rutledge Screws 325 91, 113, 134, 65 1041, 89 1495. 710; 209. exist similarly 657. Irving Brant recently well: 'Civil slander early ages substitute duel deterrent murder. orbit distribution American sovereignty fall exclusively jurisdiction states. assures exclusion absorbing First, unquestionably block considering differences derivation, purpose, value society, natural location power, compelling suits. most character. misuse offends Constitution.' insinuation positive assertion putting form derogatory. Now, balance probabilities cast, others defense; R. Vol. V, 148—149. 'Now, you, do, defamatory, intended, derogatory crime, up scorn ridicule, fellow, singly go consider—and should—whether justified. 151—152.

Category: 2