Table of Contents
FIREamicus brief urges Supreme Court to close the door on speech-chilling criminal defamation laws聽
Throwing someone in jail for badmouthing a public official is profoundly undemocratic and un-American. But that didn鈥檛 stop after he insulted them on Facebook.
New Hampshire鈥檚 makes it a misdemeanor to say or write anything that you know is false and that will expose someone to 鈥減ublic hatred, contempt or ridicule.鈥 According to the local police department, Frese violated this law when he posted a Facebook comment calling an officer a 鈥渃oward鈥 who was 鈥渃overing up for a corrupt cop.鈥
Unfortunately, more than a dozen states still maintain speech-chilling criminal libel laws like New Hampshire鈥檚 that are too frequently used to punish those who criticize government officials. So on April 27, 2023, FIREfiled an amicus brief with the Supreme Court of the United States asking it to hear Frese鈥檚 case and finally rid the country of archaic laws that criminalize libel of public officials.
Throughout the country, bloated penal codes chock-full of outdated laws already pose a great threat to free expression. The Supreme Court can finally do away with laws that directly criminalize libel of public officials, and uphold the prized American privilege to speak our minds about the government without the risk of criminal penalty.
The First Amendment doesn鈥檛 tolerate making a crime out of criticism. Early Americans denounced the Sedition Act of 1798, which made it a crime to publish 鈥渁ny false, scandalous and malicious writing 鈥 with intent to defame the government.鈥 And in the decades since, the Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed that the right to criticize public officials lies at the very heart of the First Amendment 鈥 and our nation. In Bridges v. California, for example, the Supreme Court ruled a state court could not hold a citizen and a newspaper in contempt for criticizing judicial proceedings. The Court declared 鈥渋t a prized American privilege to speak one鈥檚 mind, although not always with perfect good taste, on all public institutions.鈥
The Court last considered the constitutionality of criminal libel laws in Garrison v. Louisiana in 1964. Although it struck down Louisiana鈥檚 statute as unlawful, the Court declined to prohibit criminal libel laws entirely. Since then, Americans like Robert Frese have continued to face arrest and the stigma of a criminal record for criticizing public officials. Closing the door that Garrison left open is long overdue.
As 果冻传媒app官方鈥檚 brief details, Frese鈥檚 story exemplifies a larger trend. Law enforcement officials often selectively enforce antiquated, obscure criminal statutes to silence critics.
In Connecticut, for example, law enforcement abused a 1917 advertising law designed to rid discrimination from business accommodations to arrest naysayers. In one instance, officers arrested a man for referring to them as 鈥渃rackers.鈥 (Connecticut鈥檚 Supreme Court recently the law only reaches commercial speech.)
Connecticut Supreme Court narrows 鈥榬acial ridicule鈥 law abused by police as general hate speech law
News
On Wednesday, Connecticut鈥檚 Supreme Court held that the state鈥檚 鈥渞acial ridicule鈥 statute applies only to commercial advertisements.
In Laredo, Texas, officials dug up a thirty-year-old criminal statute 鈥 one they had never enforced before 鈥 to arrest popular citizen journalist Priscilla Villarreal simply because she asked law enforcement for newsworthy information. As a federal judge noted, Laredo officials likely would not have enforced the dusty law 鈥渁gainst a citizen whose views they agreed with, and whose questions they welcomed.鈥 (FIREcurrently represents Villarreal before the U.S Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, where a decision en banc is pending.)
And in Louisiana, police relied on the very same criminal libel statute the Supreme Court deemed unconstitutional as to public officials in Garrison to arrest a man for insulting their colleague鈥檚 handling of a murder investigation.
Throughout the country, bloated penal codes chock-full of outdated laws already pose a great threat to free expression. The Supreme Court can finally do away with laws that directly criminalize libel of public officials, and uphold the prized American privilege to speak our minds about the government without the risk of criminal penalty.
Recent Articles
FIRE鈥檚 award-winning Newsdesk covers the free speech news you need to stay informed.