小卡文,哈利。《纽约时报》案:关于“第一修正案的核心意义”的注释,1964年Sup。Ct。191年启

Joseph Russomanno
{"title":"小卡文,哈利。《纽约时报》案:关于“第一修正案的核心意义”的注释,1964年Sup。Ct。191年启","authors":"Joseph Russomanno","doi":"10.1080/10811680.2020.1767410","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Imagining an America in which officials in the highest positions of federal government support laws that criminalize the speech of their critics is not difficult. Not only were such laws passed in 1798 and 1917-18, assaults on First Amendment culture have extended into the twenty-first century. To punish his critics, for example, then-candidate Donald Trump pledged to “open up” libel laws. The ruling most responsible for narrowing libel law and limiting the success of public official plaintiffs was New York Times Co. v. Sullivan Co. A landmark analysis of the ruling followed. Taking Justice William Brennan’s opinion, Harry Kalven Jr. extracted a small phrase and breathed life into the large concept that remains as vital and","PeriodicalId":42622,"journal":{"name":"Communication Law and Policy","volume":"25 1","pages":"400 - 405"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10811680.2020.1767410","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Kalven Jr., Harry. The New York Times Case: A Note on “The Central Meaning of the First Amendment,” 1964 Sup. Ct. Rev. 191\",\"authors\":\"Joseph Russomanno\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10811680.2020.1767410\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Imagining an America in which officials in the highest positions of federal government support laws that criminalize the speech of their critics is not difficult. Not only were such laws passed in 1798 and 1917-18, assaults on First Amendment culture have extended into the twenty-first century. To punish his critics, for example, then-candidate Donald Trump pledged to “open up” libel laws. The ruling most responsible for narrowing libel law and limiting the success of public official plaintiffs was New York Times Co. v. Sullivan Co. A landmark analysis of the ruling followed. Taking Justice William Brennan’s opinion, Harry Kalven Jr. extracted a small phrase and breathed life into the large concept that remains as vital and\",\"PeriodicalId\":42622,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Communication Law and Policy\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"400 - 405\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10811680.2020.1767410\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Communication Law and Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10811680.2020.1767410\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communication Law and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10811680.2020.1767410","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

想象一个联邦政府最高职位的官员支持将批评者的言论定为犯罪的法律的美国并不困难。这些法律不仅在1798年和1917-18年获得通过,对第一修正案文化的攻击也延伸到了21世纪。例如,为了惩罚他的批评者,当时的候选人唐纳德·特朗普承诺“开放”诽谤法。对缩小诽谤法范围和限制公职人员原告成功负有最大责任的裁决是《纽约时报》公司诉沙利文公司。随后,对该裁决进行了具有里程碑意义的分析。小哈里·卡文(Harry Kalven Jr.)采纳了大法官威廉·布伦南(William Brennan)的意见,提取了一个小短语,为这个仍然至关重要的大概念注入了活力
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Kalven Jr., Harry. The New York Times Case: A Note on “The Central Meaning of the First Amendment,” 1964 Sup. Ct. Rev. 191
Imagining an America in which officials in the highest positions of federal government support laws that criminalize the speech of their critics is not difficult. Not only were such laws passed in 1798 and 1917-18, assaults on First Amendment culture have extended into the twenty-first century. To punish his critics, for example, then-candidate Donald Trump pledged to “open up” libel laws. The ruling most responsible for narrowing libel law and limiting the success of public official plaintiffs was New York Times Co. v. Sullivan Co. A landmark analysis of the ruling followed. Taking Justice William Brennan’s opinion, Harry Kalven Jr. extracted a small phrase and breathed life into the large concept that remains as vital and
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
33.30%
发文量
7
期刊介绍: The societal, cultural, economic and political dimensions of communication, including the freedoms of speech and press, are undergoing dramatic global changes. The convergence of the mass media, telecommunications, and computers has raised important questions reflected in analyses of modern communication law, policy, and regulation. Serving as a forum for discussions of these continuing and emerging questions, Communication Law and Policy considers traditional and contemporary problems of freedom of expression and dissemination, including theoretical, conceptual and methodological issues inherent in the special conditions presented by new media and information technologies.
期刊最新文献
Digital Rights in Europe After the Entry Into Force of Regulations for the Protection of Personal Data: Before and After the Right to Be Forgotten Regulatory Capture in a Transitional Democracy: Media Laws in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq Paranoid Androids: Free Speech Versus Privacy in America’s Resistance Against Intrusive Robocalls An Unreasonable Standard?: The Dilemma of Applying Actual Malice to Irrational Speakers “The Gloss of History”: A Historical Analysis of U.S. Supreme Court Justices’ Framing of First Amendment Press Rights to Cover and Access Court Proceedings
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1