Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Craig Malin v. Lee Enterprises, Inc., et al.
Paid petition · Court of Appeals of Iowa, No. 22-1940 · judgment January 24, 2024
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.
Question presented
As a global information network accessible by smartphones was science fiction, New York Times v. Sullivan federalized libel law in 1964. Variously critiqued by members of this Court, including Justice Thomas, Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kagan, Sullivan explicitly left open the question of whether “failure to retract may ever constitute evidence” of actual malice. Leaving Sullivan’s actual malice core intact, Petitioner presents two questions of national importance. The first addresses the crucial role of juries in public figure defamation cases. The second seeks an answer to the question left open sixty years ago, addressing Sullivan’s actual malice provision from a practical perspective in the internet age. Question #1 - Does grant of summary judgment to Respondent Lee Enterprises conflict with requirements for a jury trial per Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., All U.S. 242, 255 (1986)? Question #2 - Can years-spanning refusal to retract objectively false statements on a website under a publisher’s sole control constitute evidence of actual malice?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Craig Malin
For respondent
Abbey Chun Furlong
Lane & Waterman LLP
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Proceedings
- Oct 07 2024Petition DENIED.
- Jul 31 2024DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/30/2024.
- Jul 26 2024Reply of petitioner Craig Malin filed. (Distributed)
- Jul 15 2024Brief of respondents Lee Enterprises, Inc., et al. in opposition filed.
- Jun 12 2024Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 15, 2024)