New York Times v. Sullivan

Media Items
New York Times v. Sullivan - Oral Argument
Get Adobe Flash Player
New York Times v. Sullivan - Oral Argument (No. 40)
Get Adobe Flash Player
Advocates
M. Roland Nachman, Jr. (Argued the cause for the respondent)
Herbert Wechsler (Argued the cause for the petitioner)
Case Basics
Docket No.: 
39
Petitioner: 
New York Times
Respondent: 
Sullivan
Consolidation: 
Abernathy v. Sullivan, No. 40
Decided By: 
Warren Court (1962-1965)
Opinion: 
376 U.S. 254 (1964)
Argued: 
January 6-7, 1964
Categories: 
commercial speech, libel, freedom of the press, freedom of speech, first amendment
Location No location information present.

Cite this page
The Oyez Project, New York Times v. Sullivan , 376 U.S. 254 (1964)
available at: (http://oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1963/1963_39)
Facts of the Case: 

Decided together with Abernathy v. Sullivan, this case concerns a full-page ad in the New York Times which alleged that the arrest of the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. for perjury in Alabama was part of a campaign to destroy King's efforts to integrate public facilities and encourage blacks to vote. L. B. Sullivan, the Montgomery city commissioner, filed a libel action against the newspaper and four black ministers who were listed as endorsers of the ad, claiming that the allegations against the Montgomery police defamed him personally. Under Alabama law, Sullivan did not have to prove that he had been harmed; and a defense claiming that the ad was truthful was unavailable since the ad contained factual errors. Sullivan won a $500,000 judgment.

Question: 

Did Alabama's libel law, by not requiring Sullivan to prove that an advertisement personally harmed him and dismissing the same as untruthful due to factual errors, unconstitutionally infringe on the First Amendment's freedom of speech and freedom of press protections?

Conclusion: 

The Court held that the First Amendment protects the publication of all statements, even false ones, about the conduct of public officials except when statements are made with actual malice (with knowledge that they are false or in reckless disregard of their truth or falsity). Under this new standard, Sullivan's case collapsed.

Decisions

Decision: 9 votes for New York Times, 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Amendment 1: Speech, Press, and Assembly

Sort by Ideology

Voted with the majority
Warren
Wrote a special concurrence
Black
Voted with the majority, joined Black's concurrence, joined Goldberg's concurrence
Douglas
Voted with the majority
Clark
Voted with the majority
Harlan
Wrote the majority opinion
Brennan
Voted with the majority
Stewart
Voted with the majority
White
Wrote a special concurrence
Goldberg

Full Opinion by Justice William J. Brennan, Jr.

Timeplots Affiliate

Timeplots.com: A Visual History of the Supreme Court