The Oyez Project Virtual Tour of the Supreme Court Building

Abstract

Argument: Tuesday, December 3, 1985
Decision: Monday, April 21, 1986
Issues: First Amendment, Libel, Defamation

Advocates

David H. Marion (Argued the cause for the appellants)
Ronald H. Surkin (Argued the cause for the appellees)

Facts of the Case

In a series of articles, the Philadelphia Inquirer accused Hepps of links to organized crime and of capitalizing on that connection to influence the state legislature. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court favored Hepps and held that the newspaper was obligated to prove its accusations true.

Question

Did the state supreme court's decision violate the First Amendment?

Conclusion

Yes. Relying on its reasoning in Gertz v. Robert Welch Inc. (1974), the Court reversed the state court's decision. The Gertz standard for evaluating potentially libelous speech required that "the plaintiff bear the burden of showing falsity, as well as fault, before recovering damages."

Supreme Court Justice Opinions and Votes (by Ideology)

Sort by Seniority
(More information here)
Decision: 5 votes for Philadelphia Newspapers Inc., 4 vote(s) against
Legal Provision: Amendment 1: Speech, Press, and Assembly
Voted with the majority
Marshall
Wrote a regular concurrence
Brennan
Voted with the majority, joined Brennan's concurrence
Blackmun
Wrote a dissent
Stevens
Voted with the majority
Powell
Voted with the minority, joined Stevens' dissent
White
Wrote the majority opinion
O'Connor
Voted with the minority, joined Stevens' dissent
Burger
Voted with the minority, joined Stevens' dissent
Rehnquist
Full Opinion by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor

Cite this page

The Oyez Project, Philadelphia Newspapers Inc. v. Hepps, 475 U.S. 767 (1986),
available at: <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1985/1985_84_1491/>
(last visited ).