Remove Constitutional Law Remove Court Rules Remove Statute Remove Tort
article thumbnail

Supreme Court Limits Standing for Class-Action Suits Under FCRA

Constitutional Law Reporter

The District Court ruled that all class members had Article III standing on each of the three statutory claims. Justice Kavanaugh wrote: Under longstanding American law, a person is injured when a defamatory statement “that would subject him to hatred, contempt, or ridicule” is published to a third party. Robins, 578 U.S.

Court 52
article thumbnail

Australia High Court Delivers Major Blow to Free Speech In Defamation Ruling

JonathanTurley

Free speech has always held a precarious position in Australia which does not have an equivalent to the First Amendment in guaranteeing free speech as a constitutional right. Despite this history, a new decision out of the High Court is still shocking in its implications for further attacks on free speech. 47 U.S.C. §

Tort 34
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

“Nevermind”: California Man Sues Band 30 Years After Being Featured as a Naked Baby on Iconic Cover

JonathanTurley

The case is brought under statutes like 18 U.S.C. Civil and statutory claims can be curtailed by constitutional limitations. Supreme Court ruled against a provision of federal law that banned computer simulations and virtual pornography under the first amendment. This is such a case in my view. In 2002, the U.S.

article thumbnail

“A Stain on Our Democracy”: Vindman Sues Donald Trump Jr., Rudy Giuliani and Others for Witness Intimidation

JonathanTurley

Putting aside a later defamation action (though the statute of limitations is a concern), the filing could present an interesting question of whether the statute can be used to chill or curtail free speech. That was the concern that led the Supreme Court to curtail defamation actions.

article thumbnail

Trump’s Liability Or Opportunity? Two Capitol Police Officers Sue Trump Over Capitol Riot

JonathanTurley

The second “Count Five” is actually just a demand for punitive damages, rather than an actual separate tort. COUNT FOUR (Violation of a Public Safety Statute: D.C. COUNT FIVE (Violation of a Public Safety Statute: D.C. That claim runs directly counter to the controlling case law. In Brandenburg v.