Supreme Court won't take up challenge to landmark defamation case

Louisiana districts Supreme Court lawsuit

Supreme Court proceeding arguments connected Louisiana redistricting fight 03:11

Washington — The Supreme Court connected Monday declined to instrumentality up a lawsuit brought by casino mogul and Trump donor Steve Wynn that would person challenged a landmark determination that established a higher modular for nationalist figures to successfully writer for defamation. 

The Supreme Court connected Monday formally declined to see 83-year-old Wynn's petition to revisit the court's determination successful a lawsuit known as New York Times Company v. Sullivan as a portion of Wynn's ineligible conflict against the Associated Press. 

The unanimous 1964 Supreme Court determination determined the First Amendment requires a nationalist fig to beryllium a suspect acted with "actual malice" and knew a connection was mendacious oregon recklessly disregarded the anticipation that it was mendacious to prolong a assertion of defamation. The higher modular makes it much hard for those successful the nationalist oculus to triumph defamation cases. First Amendment advocates spot it arsenic a cardinal pillar connected modern property freedoms.

Wynn sued the AP successful 2018 implicit its reporting astir intersexual misconduct allegations against him from the 1970s that were filed with instrumentality enforcement. He stepped down from his presumption arsenic main enforcement of Wynn Resorts, which helium founded, successful 2018, aft the Wall Street Journal published intersexual misconduct allegations. Wynn besides stepped down from his relation arsenic the concern president for the Republican National Committee. Wynn has consistently denied immoderate allegations of misconduct. 

The New York Times v. Sullivan lawsuit came astir aft the paper published an advertisement soliciting donations to support Martin Luther King Jr. connected perjury charges. The advertisement contained immoderate factual inaccuracies. Lester Sullivan, commissioner of nationalist information successful Montgomery, Alabama, filed a libel enactment erstwhile the Times declined to publically retract the information. All 9 justices connected the Supreme Court yet agreed to overturn an Alabama court's determination and solidify protections for property coverage.

The determination successful the lawsuit has been targeted by immoderate conservatives successful caller years, and astatine slightest 2 sitting justices — Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch — person said the tribunal should revisit the ruling. 

"New York Times and the court's decisions extending it were policy-driven decisions masquerading arsenic law law," Thomas wrote successful a 2019 opinion. "If the Constitution does not necessitate nationalist figures to fulfill an actual-malice modular successful state-law defamation suits, past neither should we."

Melissa Quinn and Jacob Rosen contributed to this report.