In 1964, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark decision in NYT v. Sullivan. There the Court constitutionalized certain aspects of libel law and created out of whole cloth, and later extended, the actual malice standard that now requires public officials and public individuals to prove that someone who made a false statement about them knew it was false or acted with reckless disregard as to its falsity before prevailing in a defamation lawsuit.

Recently, scholars and some Justices have criticized this standard as being unmoored from the text and history of the Constitution. And as a practical matter, critics have argued that it allows high profile individuals to be defamed with little to no recourse. Supporters of this standard often argue that it is essential to allowing the free flow of ideas and the publication of important news stories where breaking information may later turn out to be inaccurate in some key respects.

Join us for a discussion of this important issue with leading libel litigators and First Amendment scholars.

_{Sign up to receive invitations to all public events.}

_{Terms and Conditions of Attendance}