Court Opinion

ID: 9424609
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 23:12:07.887443+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:22:51.390634
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice Black,
concurring in the judgment.
I concur in the judgment of thé Court for the reasons stated in my concurring opinion in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U. S. 254, 293 (1964), in my concurring and dissenting opinion in Curtis Publishing Co. v. Butts, 388 U. S. 130, 170 (1967), and in Mr. Justice Douglas’ concurring opinion in Garrison v. Louisiana, 379 U. S. 64, 80 (1964). I agree of course that First Amendment protection extends to “all discussion and communication involving, matters of public or general concern, without regard to whether the persons involved are famous or anonymous.” Ante, at 44. However, in my view, the First Amendment does not permit the recovery of libel judgments against the news media even when statements are broadcast with knowledge they are false. As I stated in Curtis Publishing Co. v. Butts, supra, “[I]t is time for this Court to abandon New York Times Co. v. Sullivan and adopt the rule to the effect that the First Amendment was intended to leave the press free from the harassment of libel judgments.” Id., at 172.