New York Times v. Sullivan - Significance, Supreme Court Protects The Press, Actual Malice Standards, Further Readings
The New York Times Company
L. B. Sullivan
That the Supreme Court of Alabama's affirmation of a libel judgment against the Times violated the free speech and due process rights as defined by the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution and certain Supreme Court decisions; also, that an advertisement published in the Times was not libelous and the Supreme Court should reverse the decision of the Alabama trial court.
Chief Lawyers for Appellant
Herbert Brownell, Thomas F. Daly and Herbert Wechsler
Chief Lawyers for Appellee
Sam Rice Baker, M. Roland Nachman, Jr. and Robert E. Steiner III
Justices for the Court
Hugo Lafayette Black, William J. Brennan, Jr. (writing for the Court), Tom C. Clark, William O. Douglas, Arthur Goldberg, John Marshall Harlan II, Potter Stewart, Earl Warren, Byron R. White
Date of Decision
9 March 1964
The Alabama courts' decisions were reversed.
- Stromberg v. California,283 U.S. 359 (1931).
- DeJonge v. Oregon, 299 U.S. 353 (1937).
- Lovell v. Griffin, 303 U.S. 444 (1938).
- Terminiello v. Chicago, 337 U.S. 1 (1949).
- Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476 (1957).
- Speiser v. Randall, 357 U.S. 513 (1958).
- NAACP v. Button, 371 U.S. 415 (1963).
- Onion Field Murder Trials: 1963-69 - Start Of A Legal Marathon, Exit Kanarek, Death Penalty Decision
- New York Times Company v. United States - Significance, The Government Moves To Stop The Leak, Supreme Court Throws Out Government's Case
- New York Times v. Sullivan - Further Readings
- New York Times v. Sullivan - Significance
- New York Times v. Sullivan - Supreme Court Protects The Press
- New York Times v. Sullivan - Actual Malice Standards
- Other Free Encyclopedias