I do not share PJ Media's anticipatory glee that the Supreme Court is going to take this case because Donald Trump "has been muttering for a year about 'taking a look at' the libel laws." Three years ago, in Hoeper v. Air Wisconsin, the Court widened the scope of the 1964 NY Times v Sullivan libel ruling, not narrowed it.
Also, what PJ Media considers the self-evident monolithic effort to "destroy" Sarah Palin, because of her "electrifying" convention speech? I wouldn't count on that being a pillar of a winning lawsuit, either.
It's not even a sound example of cause and effect. Which makes it off key in a complaint about Palin's rhetoric leading to Gifford's shooting.
I do not share PJ Media's anticipatory glee that the Supreme Court is going to take this case because Donald Trump "has been muttering for a year about 'taking a look at' the libel laws." Three years ago, in Hoeper v. Air Wisconsin, the Court widened the scope of the 1964 NY Times v Sullivan libel ruling, not narrowed it.
ReplyDeleteAlso, what PJ Media considers the self-evident monolithic effort to "destroy" Sarah Palin, because of her "electrifying" convention speech? I wouldn't count on that being a pillar of a winning lawsuit, either.
It's not even a sound example of cause and effect. Which makes it off key in a complaint about Palin's rhetoric leading to Gifford's shooting.