Gertz (p. 1320) Notes

The Sullivan rule applies to public officials and to candidates for public office in order to ensure a margin of safety for debate on public matters and issues.

What about people like Taylor Swift, Greg Gutfeld, and Beyoncé? Should the Sullivan rule apply to defamatory statements about celebrities who are not government officials?

 The Court has extended the Sullivan rule to cases involving so-called public persons or “public figures” – Pages1323:  “Those who, by reason of the notoriety of their achievements or the vigor and success with which they seek the public's attention, are properly classed as public figures.”

 Should the Sullivan rule be extended to protect the press against movie stars and famous athletes?  Central meaning of the First Amendment? Seditious libel analogy has been stretched to protect Hollywood gossip columns.

 On the other hand, public figures have access to the media that private individuals don’t have (counterspeech self-help).  Also, those who seek the spot light assume the risk of media attention and gossip.  Public figures are involved in shaping the culture just as public officials are involved in shaping public policy. As some have noted. politics is downstream from culture.

 What about defamation concerning a private individual?  Are there any constitutional limitations?  Suppose the Daily News reports that some celebrity’s wife has a serious substance abuse problem?  Suppose this report is false.

 Page 1324: “We hold that, so long as they do not impose liability without fault, the States may define for themselves the appropriate standard of liability for a publisher or broadcaster of defamatory falsehood injurious to a private individual.”  No Strict Liability for defamation. But negligence standard is okay.

 Any other limitations in defamation actions involving private plaintiffs?

 Although when actual damages are proven a negligence standard is appropriate, “the States may not permit recovery of presumed or punitive damages, at least when liability is not based on a showing of knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard of the truth.” Id.

The court held that Gertz was not a public figure.  Why not?   Just a lawyer doing his job!

What about Johnny Cochran defending O.J. in a high profile murder trial.  Public figure?  Does he “thrust himself into the vortex” of a public issue? (p. 1328)

 Court has also held that a private-figure plaintiff cannot recover damages unless he or she proves that the defamatory statements are false.  Nowak Hornbook at 1046.  

 Plaintiff must prove negligence and falsity.  [ONE COURT HAS STATED THAT DEFINING “PUBLIC FIGURE” IS “MUCH LIKE TRYING TO NAIL A JELLYFISH TO THE WALL”  SEE SMOLLA at 135]