MAGA taming MSM criticism by killing the Sullivan defamation standard

CONTEXT

As I predicted last month, DJT and his morally rotted, kleptocratic authoritarian wealth and power movement are moving briskly to reign in the MSM (mainstream media). They are deploying one of the best, most effective weapons they have, defamation lawsuits. MAGA and the radical right generally have been chafing under the old Sullivan standard for defamation of a public official or famous person. In a nutshell, here's the existing defamation law that MAGA is focused on taking down to neuter the MSM and all other significant critics:

In the landmark 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, the USSC held that for a public official to succeed in a defamation lawsuit, they must prove that the defamatory statement was made with "actual malice." This means the defendant either knew the statement was false or recklessly disregarded whether it might be false. Later the USSC expanded the standard to include public figures. Public officials include, law enforcement personnel, members of legislative bodies, mayors, governors, and other elected representatives at various levels of government, officials appointed to positions of authority, such as judges, commissioners of state agencies, and members of state boards. Under the Sullivan standard, a famous person, or public figure, is defined as someone who has achieved a role of special prominence in society due to notoriety (accidental or not), achievements, or by actively seeking public attention.

Authoritarian regimes frequently engage in crackdowns of criticism by the media and prominent public figures as a means to maintain control over information, suppress dissent, and ensure political legitimacy. Common methods of crackdown include (i) enacting legislation or regulations to restrict freedom of speech and press or to limit media competition (DJT already did that the last time he was in office), (ii) getting judges who create new definitions of defamation (what MAGA is trying to do right now), (iii) increased prosecutions of journalists, (iv) economic pressure or sanctions to muzzle criticisms, e.g., having authoritarian billionaires buy media conglomerates, (v) economic sanctions with the redistribution of media assets to pro-government sources, and (vi) intimidation and threats of violence. Defamation lawsuits aim to intimidate and financially burden media organizations, a tactic reminiscent of most other authoritarian leaders and movements that use lawsuits to exhaust journalists and media outlets.

DJT and MAGA have employed several such strategies to crack down on media criticism. In addition to filing defamation lawsuits, DJT and MAGA have repeatedly threatened to revoke media broadcast licenses, e.g., revocation of broadcasting licenses for CBS, ABC, and NBC. DJT and MAGA have also unleashed rhetorical assaults, calling the MSM the "enemy of the people", repeating classical 20th century tyrant rhetoric.

*******************************************************************

DJT AND MAGA ATTACKS ON THE SULLIVAN STANDARD

The NYT writes about the onslaught against the MSM (not paywalled):

Trump and His Picks Threaten More Lawsuits Over Critical Coverage

The small flurry of threatened defamation suits is the latest sign that the incoming Trump administration appears poised to do what it can to crack down on unfavorable media coverage.

The legal threats have arrived in various forms. One aired on CNN. Another came over the phone. More arrived in letters or emails.

All of them appeared aimed at intimidating news outlets and others who have criticized or questioned President-elect Donald J. Trump and his nominees to run the Pentagon and F.B.I.

The small flurry of threatened defamation lawsuits is the latest sign that the incoming Trump administration appears poised to do what it can to crack down on unfavorable media coverage.

On Saturday, ABC News said it had agreed to give $15 million to Mr. Trump’s future presidential foundation and museum to settle a defamation suit that Mr. Trump filed against the network and one of its anchors, George Stephanopoulos. Mr. Trump sued in March after Mr. Stephanopoulos inaccurately said the former president had been found “liable for rape” in a civil trial in New York, though the judge in the case later noted that the state has a narrow legal definition of rape. In fact, Mr. Trump had been found liable for sexual abuse.

The settlement followed months of attacks by Mr. Trump and his allies on ABC News, with the once and future president going so far as to say that the network should lose its federal broadcast license.

The deal set off criticism of ABC News by those who perceived the network as needlessly bowing down to Mr. Trump.

Regarding the settlement with ABC News, the NYT quotes an expert, RonNell Andersen Jones, a professor of law at the University of Utah:

“What we might be seeing here is an attitudinal shift,” she added. “Compared to the mainstream American press of a decade ago, today’s press is far less financially robust, far more politically threatened, and exponentially less confident that a given jury will value press freedom, rather than embrace a vilification of it.” 

 

In [the E. Jean Carroll sex abuse] case, a federal jury found Mr. Trump liable for sexually abusing and defaming the writer E. Jean Carroll, but it did not find him liable for rape. Still, the judge who oversaw the proceeding later clarified that because of New York’s narrow legal definition of rape, the jury’s verdict did not mean that Ms. Carroll had “failed to prove that Mr. Trump ‘raped’ her as many people commonly understand the word ‘rape.’”

Newsweek writes about the settlement with ABC News:

ABC News is facing backlash from both Democrats and Republicans following its $15-million settlement with Donald Trump.

The settlement describes the funding as a "charitable contribution" from the broadcaster. Additionally, the network will pay $1 million in legal fees to Trump's attorneys.

Trump filed the defamation suit after Stephanopoulos claimed during a March 10 segment of ABC News' This Week while interviewing Representative Nancy Mace, a South Carolina Republican, that Trump had been "found liable for rape" in connection to writer E. Jean Carroll's lawsuits. Neither verdict involved a finding of rape as defined under New York law.

"People are not going to forget what ABC did," the Republicans Against Trump X, formerly Twitter, account said.

Conservative political scientist Norman Jay Ornstein added: "Add ABC to the basket of cowards in our media."

Democratic attorney Marc Elias wrote: "Knee bent. Ring kissed. Another legacy news outlet chooses obedience."

Reporter Oliver Willis also chimed in, writing on Threads: "This is actually how democracy dies."

The malicious, anti-democratic intent of DJT and MAGA attacking the MSM could not be much clearer. They want to force the MSM to shut down or stop criticizing him, his political wealth and power movement and his cadre of enabling MAGA thugs, perverts, grifters, deranged zealots, cranks and criminals. It really is just that simple.

Qs: Is it really just that simple, or if not, why not? Too hyperbolic/alarmist? Not supported by sufficient facts? Flawed reasoning? Too partisan biased?