The US Supreme Court yesterday declined to hear a case brought by casino mogul Steve Wynn asking for the justices to overturn or narrow New York Times v. Sullivan, a 1964 case that established the nation’s strict threshold for what constitutes libel.
Wynn originally sued the Associated Press in 2018 after a story referenced a pair of police reports regarding sexual misconduct in the 1970s, accusing the reporters of libel (the suit was dismissed by a Nevada court). The six-decade-old Sullivan ruling established a high threshold for libel, requiring “actual malice” be demonstrated—generally meaning plaintiffs must show the authors either knew the content was false or acted with reckless disregard to its veracity. Legal analysts said a reexamination of the decision may ultimately lower that standard, removing protections for reporting on public figures.
Separately, the court heard oral arguments yesterday challenging Louisiana’s updated congressional map, which was redrawn last year to include a second majority-Black district. The state—whose population is roughly one-third Black—previously only had one (of six) majority Black districts.