Infowars, LLC, et al. v. Marcel Fontaine

New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964) establishes that speech must be “of and concerning” a specific individual for that individual to state a state tort claim for that speech. The Court further explained in Rosenblatt v. Baer, 383 U.S. 75

1. that “of and concerning” test requires specific identifying references to the person claiming tortious conduct. Greenbelt Cooperative Publishing Assn., Inc. v. Bresler, 398 U.S. 6 (1970) also establishes that journalists who accurately report others’ factual statements may comment, opine, and theorize on those statements with full confidence in the First Amendment’s protections. The Texas Court of Appeals held that the Sullivan/Rosenblatt test could be satisfied based on specific references to a limited class of individuals. It also held that journalists’ video replay of shooting victims’ comments and their subsequent questioning of the victims’ stories as being connected to a possible staged tragedy by state and federal governments contained sufficiently interspersed facts and opinion to place them on the wrong side of the First Amendment. The questions presented are:

2. Whether the First Amendment bars tort actions seeking damages for speech on matters of public concern directed at a loosely associated, large class of people rather than at specific individuals?

3. Whether the First Amendment bars tort actions seeking damages for a media organization’s accurate replay of factual statements and a commentator’s opinion on those facts as accurately replayed?