I think the argument for liability in Hustler was considerably weaker. What
actual harm did Falwell experience? Nobody reading Hustler could have
expected the piece was factual. Different set of parameters
I also think that the doctrine of defamation is not solely about the speech but
also
Eugene is right -- I was asking about the sound aspect, i.e. could the protest
be heard during the funeral ceremony, were they using megaphones, etc.
Eugene -- if the shouting could be heard during the funeral ceremony, do you
think IIED liability would be constitutional, in addition to TMP
Eric Rassbach writes:
Eugene is right -- I was asking about the sound aspect, i.e. could the
protest be
heard during the funeral ceremony, were they using megaphones, etc.
Eugene -- if the shouting could be heard during the funeral ceremony, do you
think
IIED liability would be
I should think that I'd be extremely distressed to see an article in a
magazine -- even a clearly non-factual article -- that talked about my supposed
sexual encounter with my mother, however fictional the encounter would clearly
be. The jury found that Falwell was indeed seriously
I think Eugene has oversimplified defamation law here. We hold some
tortfeasors to an actual malice standard while others are held to more lax
standard. So while false statements of fact are a constant minimum element of
proof (because they lack value AND are very likely to cause harm to
Well, the premise of the constitutionality of libel law -- whether
under an actual malice standard, a negligence standard, or a (possibly
permissible) strict liability standard -- is that false statements of fact lack
constitutional value; the mens rea standard is there chiefly to make
Under international law, freedom of speech can be limited when it impinges
the rights of others provided the limitations are part of the law of the
country. Surely that is sound principle that is in fact at least at part at
work in many 1st Amendment speech cases that would otherwise be even more
I share Eugene's hope that the Court does not deform current doctrine.
Although I am not at all confident that it will do so, the Court
could reverse the fourth circuit on narrow grounds. The Epic included
what were alleged to be provably false statements of fact (Albert and
Julie . . .
Steve has said much more eloquently what I was trying to say to Eugene. I
agree with Steve that the categories drawn by Eugene are not as hard and
fast as he has depicted them.
This case is teed up to be one of those cases where law professors are
shocked by the reasoning, but only
So , Marci, you would allow this church to picket same sex weddings? And you
would bar pickets from a funeral at which cheney spoke about the importance of
the iraq war?
Marc
- Original Message -
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
To:
10 matches
Mail list logo
