Why Most People Lose Defamation Lawsuits | New York Times v. Sullivan

Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @iammrbeat
In episode 70 of Supreme Court Briefs, a police commissioner sues the New York Times for defamation after it runs an ad that talks trash about his department.
Produced by Matt Beat (Beat Productions). All images/video by Matt Beat, found in the public domain, or used under fair use guidelines. Music by @ElectricNeedleRoom(Mr. Beat's band). Download the song here: electricneedleroom.bandcamp.c...
Mr. Beat's Supreme Court Briefs playlist: • Supreme Court Briefs
Here's an annotated script with footnotes: docs.google.com/document/d/1I...
Check out cool primary sources here:
www.oyez.org/cases/1789-1850/...
Other sources used:
www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/...
supreme.justia.com/cases/fede...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barron_...
www.thirteen.org/wnet/supreme...
A related case: • That Time a Porn Magaz...
For sponsorship and business inquiries or to send snail mail to Mr. Beat:
www.iammrbeat.com/contact.html
/ iammrbeat
How to support and donate to my channel:
On KZbin subscribe to @iammrbeat & hit the notification bell 🔔
Join for great perks on Patreon: / iammrbeat
Donate to Mr. Beat on Paypal: www.paypal.me/mrbeat
Buy Mr. Beat a coffee: ko-fi.com/iammrbeat
Book me on Cameo, yo: www.cameo.com/iammrbeat
Subscribe to my second channel: @mattbeatgoeson
Join Patreon for The Beat Goes On: / thebeatgoeson
Connect with me:
Links to everything: linktr.ee/iammrbeat
My website: www.iammrbeat.com/
My podcast: anchor.fm/thebeatpod
Reddit: / mrbeat
@beatmastermatt on Twitter: / beatmastermatt
Facebook: / iammrbeat
Instagram: / iammrbeat
Beatcord: / discord
Mr. Beat's TikTok: / iammrbeat
Mr. Beat merch:
matt-beat-shop.fourthwall.com/
www.bonfire.com/store/mr-beat/
sfsf.shop/support-mrbeat/
amzn.to/3fdakiZ
#supremecourtbriefs #supremecourt #apgovt
New York City
March 29, 1960
The New York Times publishes a full-page advertisement called “Heed Their Rising Voices,” which aimed to shine a spotlight on the persecution of and violence against civil rights protestors throughout the South. It specifically talks trash about the Montgomery, Alabama police force, saying that they had arrested Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. seven times and that “truckloads” of them had stormed the Alabama State College. So uh…yeah…the ad had definitely stretched the truth. When Montgomery’s police commissioner, L.B. Sullivan, saw the ad, he was like “what the heck?!?” He viewed it as a personal attack on him and his entire police force.
Even though the ad didn’t specifically name Sullivan, he decided to write the New York Times anyway, asking the newspaper to publish a retraction of the ad. In other words, Sullivan wanted the New York Times to take it all back and admit to publishing false information. Well, the New York Times issued no such retraction. Instead, its lawyers wrote Sullivan a nice little letter that said the newspaper had no good reason to publish a retraction. Specifically, their letter said, “we…are somewhat puzzled as to how you think the statements in any way reflect on you,” adding, “you might, if you desire, let us know in what respect you claim that the statements in the advertisement reflect on you.”
Uh-huh. Sullivan didn’t like that so much, either. He sued the New York Times, saying the newspaper broke Alabama’s law for libel, a type of written defamation that hurt the reputation of someone or something. He also sued four African American ministers mentioned in the ad. After this, the New York Times did issue a retraction, but only for the Governor of Alabama, John Patterson….not Sullivan. In the Circuit Court of Montgomery County, Sullivan only had to prove that the New York Times published mistakes and that they probably hurt his reputation. The court sided with Sullivan, ordering the New York Times to award him with $500,000 in damages, which is nearly $5 million in today’s money. The New York Times appealed to the Alabama Supreme Court, but it agreed with the lower court. After this, the newspaper appealed again, this time to the SUPREME Supreme Court, who agreed to hear oral arguments in January 1964. The New York Times, of course, argued that the freedom of speech and freedom of the press parts of the First Amendment protected their right to publish that ad. It also argued that Alabama’s libel law specifically went against the First Amendment.

[@iammrbeat]

I wrote a new book all about the Supreme Court! Check it out here: amzn.to/3p8nV64 or visit www.iammrbeat.com/merch.html.

[@BladeTNT2018]

Roper v Simmons

[@ekmalsukarno2302]

Mr. Beat, it would mean a lot to me if you made a video on the topic of Ozawa v. United States. Here is the link below. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozawa_v._United_States

[@matthewtyppo5727]

Would be interesting to see Myers vs United States because it gave the president authority to remove people from the government

[@iammrbeat]

@@BladeTNT2018 That one has been on my list for soooo long

[@iammrbeat]

@@ekmalsukarno2302 Thanks for suggesting it

[@GottlikeDamon]

There are so many famous people who claim they were defamed, but they never prove actual malice. They would rather play their cards with PR, saying how everything is "fake," even when demonstrated otherwise.

[@iammrbeat]

True. Often celebrities feel like they "win" just through the act of suing, often knowing they have little chance of actually winning any damages.

[@DavidBugea]

With celebrities there used to be a saying: “Any publicity is good publicity.” Meaning that even the most outlandish and heinous lie about them would keep their name before the public, and could later be disproven with their reputation restored. Unfortunately, people such as Roscoe “Fatty” Arbuckle found that image rehabilitation was not as easy nor complete as one might hope.

[@tdawgmaster1729]

@@DavidBugea What do you mean "used to be?"

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MRBWEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAST

[@pocketsycho8720]

Here’s the thing though. If the media rushes to publish a story and they publish statements that are incorrect and the media refuses to retract the publication and it causes the celebrity damages and they are able to prove that A the statements published were false and that B they caused damage why does it matter if there was malice?

[@moses4769]

I was literally just researching this case earlier this week. I think Mr. Beat can read minds.

[@iammrbeat]

😳

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat ARE U THE REEEEEEEL MRBEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAST ?????????

[@JohnSmith-us9fv]

No I think that it was just coincidence because the amount and kind of viewers Mr. Beasts has makes it probable for this coincidence to happen. But of course he did read your mind.

[@mjvajda]

Great video like always, Mr. Beat! In terms of your next SCOTUS case, I would say one of the following: Chisholm v. Georgia (1793) Fletcher v. Peck (1810) Prigg v. Pennsylvania (1841) U.S. v. Butler (1936) or Schechter Poultry Corp. v. U.S. (1935)

[@hangisioux4104]

I wanna see and learn about Chisholm v. Georgia (1793)

[@iammrbeat]

That's a great list there. I already have scripts written for three of those! :)

[@hangisioux4104]

@@iammrbeat thanks mr. beat for being a great history teacher, I'm a huge fan myself of history, also can you do a history timeline for John f Kennedy and Lbj and Richard Nixon and Gerald ford and Jimmy carter like you did with Herbert hoover and IKE.

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MRBEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAST

[@ipppppi1205]

Nowaday feel like defamation lawsuit are almost like half empty threat as a PR move rather than actually proving innocent or not.

[@iammrbeat]

EXACTLY

[@EnigmaticLucas]

Aka a SLAPP

[@toadwithtoes]

MRBEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAST

[@iseeeverything]

Wtf we were just having a debate in history class today and my teacher added "well, most people lose defamation lawsuits anyway" (also, we had a test on supreme court rulings just the other week and my teacher played multiple of your supreme court brief videos) and then like 5 hours later you drop this banger. Creepy!

[@iammrbeat]

WOAHNESS 😳

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MRBEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASRT

[@jkitty542]

There is a case going on in Newton Iowa right now that relates to this. A teenager named Tayvin Galanakis was pulled over for a headlight infraction, and with zero probable cause, was arrested for suspicion of driving under the influence. A comprehensive drug test proves the kid was sober, and the kid goes home and posts on social media a link to an article showing that the arresting officer had a protection from abuse order filed against him from a former girlfriend, asking why an officer was allowed to remain on the force after committing domestic assault. Now that officer is suing the kid for defamation and libel. Precedents like this prove that this officer has no legal leg to stand on, but he's still allowed to abuse the legal system to punish a teenager. Sound fair?

[@iammrbeat]

I didn't know about this case. Thanks for bringing it to our attention.

[@jkitty542]

@@iammrbeat Attorney Tom made a video on it the other day, which is how I heard about it.

[@Compucles]

The officer will almost certainly lose the case and accomplish nothing but to bring even more attention to himself and his past behavior. He's a real idiot. Anyway, it seems your real issue is with how easy it is to file suit in the first place. Keeping in mind that some restrictions are already in place, how exactly would you restrict the process further without cutting out anyone who really does need to file a law suit?

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat REEL MRBEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAST

[@alonkatz4633]

After all the news about deep fake, I immediately thought of this case. It's probably a matter of time until the courts out how to address the use of people's faces and voices on the Internet, so this is a good time to go back to the root of it all. For the next video, I suggest "Gonzales v. Raich". I hate this decision with a passion.

[@iammrbeat]

Oh boy, deepfakes are already opening a whole new can of legal worms. And great suggestion! That one has been on my list for a long time.

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MR BEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAST

[@sirhenrymorgan1187]

@@iammrbeat What is your opinion on deepfakes? Deepfakes of any kind. Political, pornographic, etc. Unless I’m horribly mistaken (and apologies if I am), you’ve made it clear that you hold the 1st Amendment sacrosanct (it’s why you consider Lincoln overrated, due to his overreach when it came to combating Confederate propaganda). Do deepfakes count as freedom of speech and freedom of expression? Should they be protected if it can’t be proven that they were made with malice? Perhaps it’s too early to tell, no precedents set as of yet in this regard. But if you have an opinion, I’d love to hear it. Or if you don’t have an opinion, I just wanna say hey 👋. I’m really diggin’ your vids. Keep up the good work 👍!

[@leebarnathan4728]

Thank you, Mr. Beat, for making this one, which I (and I'm sure others) suggested. Always nice to know you're listening to your viewers.😀

[@iammrbeat]

I certainly try!

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MRBEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAST

[@UncleMikeNJ]

Mr. Beat > Mr. Beast

[@noncreativeguy7284]

Yay my favorite series! I always find these the most fun and enjoyable to watch!

[@iammrbeat]

I'm so glad you enjoy them! :)

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat RKRKRKRKRKRKR MRBEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAST

[@johnshafer7214]

Elected officials hate newspapers that speak badly about them. I'm the thankful for the first amendment of the Bill of Rights. The first amendment is very important to protecting our freedom.

[@iammrbeat]

Preach!

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MR PREACH

[@haakonlien7107]

Literally just talked about this case extensively in a take him exam. Mr. Beat is a BEAST

[@luismaningat5909]

My favourite series! Thanks Mr Beat!

[@PremierCCGuyMMXVI]

Thank you a lot Mr. Beat, this definitely helped with my APGOV class which I’m enjoying a lot :)

[@joelmonsion1639]

Some of your videos are so underrated. Thanks for making these videos, they are gold

[@ljphoenix4341]

This series may not get as many views as other videos on this channel, but i'm really glad Mr Beat has kept making them, i find these cases rather interesting.

[@AjarTadpole7202]

I think both sides were wrong. If someone knowingly publishes false information with the purpse of defamation, then that should be illegal(Like what the NYT did here). However, Sullivan went overboard in sueing everyone involved and not trying to talk it out first, as well as claiming it was a personal attack when it was clearly an attack on the department.

[@iammrbeat]

That's a quite reasonable take

[@str.77]

Which means the Warren Court issued another false decision.

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MRBEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAST

[@shirtless6934]

There was no "talking it out." The Alabama bigots intended to stamp out the civil rights protests and destroy anyone who aided them, such as the New York Times.

[@Orion-yd4dy]

One of the greatest Supreme Court cases in history, written by my favorite Justice, William Brennan. Thanks Mr. Beat!

[@clefofcividale8896]

I love this. Thank you for teaching us. It's not a Supreme Court thought but I think it would be interesting to see the history and changes of the 2 major political parties in the US.

[@bobdorgs2]

Interesting video! Always learn something from Mr beat!

[@SageArdor]

Hi Mr. Beat. Have you discussed Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc.? That's the 1998 Supreme Court case where it was unanimously ruled that sexual harassment bans in workplaces also applied when both parties were of the same sex.

[@iammrbeat]

I never even heard of this case. I appreciate you bringing it to my attention.

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MRBEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAST

[@HarvestStore]

I appreciate you, thank you for making content.

[@PaultheAlien4]

Aptly timed video, Mr Beat! I also love this series

[@iammrbeat]

Well thank you!

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MRBEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAST

[@yellowraccoon786]

I literally just read up on this case in my paralegal class. And you uploaded a video on it?! What a coincidence 🤣

[@DollarGeneral_Is_a_Plague]

Hey Mr beat can you do a quick video or even a short on TEACHER strikes!? Who initiates it, how the process works... Statistics and such... That'd be different and neat.

[@iammrbeat]

Great suggestion!

[@austinhhollinger]

One of the newspapers in my county refused to publish a piece that I had written criticizing one of our county officials even after I cited the Sullivan case and pretty thoroughly explained that my peace is well within the safe standard of Sullivan. Everything I said about this particular public official was true. I ended up getting my piece published in one of the other newspapers in the area.

[@utkarsh698]

One of the best channel Love from India 🔥

[@iammrbeat]

Thanks for watching from all the way over there! I hope to visit your fine country one day.

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MRBEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAS

[@ArmandoValerio65]

Another classic Mr. Beat Supreme Court Briefs.

[@atharvadeshpande1826]

I love your Supreme Court Briefs videos 😊

[@iammrbeat]

Well thank you!

[@bonnieheckman5049]

I really like the Supreme Court Briefs! Interesting, as always.

[@jonathangasana]

Great video! SC briefs are the best and thanks for explaining this to the tee.

[@iammrbeat]

Thank you! 😊

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MRBEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAST

[@Flyingclam]

I think with the the ease of access and disaportionate effect social media has, we need to reevaluate our defamation laws. Its just too easy to destroy someone's life with blantatly flase info and claim "it was an accident". We should look into adding an absurity or negligence clause. Something to allow better discouragement aganist this stuff

[@lightyagami3492]

I think if it's a case where you can easily destroy somebody's reputation (ie a false sexual assault claim) then yes the false accusor should be liable for damages. Of course you have to prove malice and it should be on a case by case basis.

[@TheRennDawg]

How about Wickard v. Filburn? One of the worst decisions in Supreme Court history

[@iammrbeat]

Well, I am planning on covering U.S. v. Lopez sooner than later

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MRBEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAST

[@luisfilipe2023]

My favorite series has returned at last 🎉

[@iammrbeat]

:)

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MRBEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAS T

[@ifthen1526]

I'm from Montgomery... Now in CA, it's sad to see California turning into the part of Alabama I grew up hating.

[@iammrbeat]

How so?

[@str.77]

​@@iammrbeat One-party state espousing racial discrimination instead of solving actual problems.

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MRBEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAST

[@andrewjgrimm]

California??

[@maurits490]

In Dutch law we know three types of defamation: - plain insult, which just means insulting someone -libel, which means you wanted to hurt somebody’s reputation deliberately - Slander, which means you want to hurt someone’s reputation deliberately with facts that you know are false.

[@nuke___8876]

I think you should do a video on Kelo v. CIty of New London (2005) because it's still controversial and doesn't divide via neat partisan lines. It also challenges what most people think eminent domain is (building infrastructure) versus what it has become (anything that can be argued is "for the public good" regardless of if it is publicly or privately owned). It's also very unique to the USA. Even China has laws that don't allow imminent domain to be used for private development. Hell it's even difficult to use emminent domain for public development in China.

[@iammrbeat]

I already did! 🙂

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MRBBBBBBBBBBBBEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAsT

[@qiuyushi2752]

Hey Mr. Beat, could you do a series of shorts or a video on how electoral systems to elect a legislature/parliament? Like multi member districts, proportional representation, etc.

[@iammrbeat]

This is a lovely suggestion.

[@GB6__YT]

I’ve missed this series - it’s my favorite aside from the Presidential elections!

[@iammrbeat]

Well I have many more planned!

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MTBEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAST

[@joshuahawkins9847]

This case is really interesting because there’s a huge balancing test. I honestly don’t know how I feel about it

[@chilloutloops9916]

Yeah, like personally I feel that someone who knowingly publishes false or highly misleading/ incomplete information should 100% be held accountable under the law. I don't get why people can't understand the difference between a free press and basically allowing biased reporters to bend the truth any which way (and sometimes outright lie) with basically zero consequence.

[@topnotch4598]

We just went over this in my college federal government class.

[@evanlucas8914]

Here are the elements of actual defamation. 1) there must be a false statement that is represented as truth 2) that false statement must be intentionally or knowingly communicated to a third party 3) the communication must cause quantifiable damage to the person's business, reputation, social standing, etc.

[@ninapatalo]

Hello Mr. Beat Can you do a live stream where you rank your president's songs?

[@iammrbeat]

lol great suggestion

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat oh crap thats my longest mrbeast me so kool

[@ACompleteUnknown97]

I’m a law student who’s supposed to be writing an essay on defamation right now, fantastic timing

[@narutophuc4827]

Hi Mr Beat, you need to cover Cohen v California which is a landmark case about states cant prohibit expletive profanity speech as criminal offense

[@MegaTreeBark]

I dig the briefs I stand by let it be known word yo word

[@iammrbeat]

Thank you. :)

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MR BRIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEF

[@StateoftheWorld]

I noticed you don’t have a vid for Everton V Board yet, would love to see it!

[@bdodson5]

I think the Miranda case would be a good review. Thanks for your work.

[@SimonPageSA]

Already done it.

[@PopeLando]

1:18 I used to have one of those typewriters!

[@CT-1118]

MrBreast give me money

[@chrisp679]

Yes. The briefs are back.

[@iammrbeat]

And more to come!

[@chrisp679]

Keep them coming, Mr. Beat. They’re what got me interested in your channel. 🙂 Keep up the good fight.

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MRBEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAST

[@MomentsInTrading]

You should follow this up with the case between Hustler Magazine and Jerry Falwell.

[@imbyron5356]

You've got a series on the supreme court and one on the presidents. You should have a series on Congress. You could go through various pieces of landmark legislation and trace it's path through Congress.

[@iammrbeat]

I do like this idea 🤔

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MRBEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAST

[@ethankiter9323]

One Inc v Olesen would be interesting to hear!

[@apexplayz4915]

Good ruling from the SC in my opinion

[@iammrbeat]

Yeah, I agree

[@apexplayz4915]

@@iammrbeat love your vids Mr beat keep them up

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MRBEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAST

[@creamofyeet2932]

Mr. Beat is my go to youtube channel

[@Nullicity]

mr beast give me money

[@TroyVan6654]

I want to slap Justice Brennan for coining the phrase "actual malice". It's natural to take it to mean "ill intent", but Justice Brennan defined it as "with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not".

[@cypress7]

Hey Mr. Beat! Can you compare the Twin Cities and the Dallas-Forth Worth metro?

[@iammrbeat]

I love this idea.

[@AaronOfMpls]

I'll be looking forward to that if it happens! Though it's also got me thinking of Minneapolis-St Paul vs Duluth-Superior (Twin Cities vs Twin Ports), and Duluth-Superior vs Thunder Bay.

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MRBEAAAAAAAAAAAAAST

[@slowdownex]

Wow, so you're telling me his own state courts awarded him an inordinate amount of damages for a case that didnt even mention him, against a northern state liberal state during the civil rights movement? Wow! No conflicts of interest there!😂

[@AmberWool]

Are the requirements for Libel and Slander different in the UK?

[@danol.8595]

You should do the Larry Flynn case

[@UncleMikeNJ]

The government of the State of Alabama: The more things change, the more they stay the same.

[@johncrandall5782]

As a special education teacher I’d love to see an episode on PARC v PA

[@iammrbeat]

Thanks for the suggestion!

[@gamerchess6739]

It’s a great case!

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MRBEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAST

[@tylerhackner9731]

Very interesting case

[@iammrbeat]

And still very relevant!

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MRBEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAST

[@jacobryan365]

Defamation cases have surely taken the spotlight during a certain recent presidential administration

[@iammrbeat]

Yeah, that's at least partially why I was motivated to make this.

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MR BEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAST

[@TheDanEdwards]

Whoever was using that typewriter obviously has not used mechanical typewriters often. How they moved (1:27) the carriage back and then advanced the paper - it's like they didn't know it is done in one movement. The hunt-and-pecking also... Ok, so this is all pedantic, but back in 1960 the typewriter pool at the NYT would have known how to use a typewriter, regardless of the merits of any advertisement.

[@iammrbeat]

True. I wish I had better stock footage to choose from. 😄

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MRBEEEEEEEEEEEEAST

[@luisfilipe2023]

I’m all for free speech but this decision seemed to be more about press privilege then anything else. Defamation and the spread of lies should never be protected especially in public policy

[@iammrbeat]

In my opinion, that can be too broad- the courts would be swamped with cases

[@luisfilipe2023]

@@iammrbeat I am just tired of media organizations blatantly lying or distorting the truth. Maybe if one or two get a lawsuit that would be enough to make media more careful and trustworthy

[@str.77]

​@@iammrbeat It is the courts' job to uphold the law, which includes the rights of individuals. "It's too much work" can never be a justification.

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MRBEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAST

[@LoveHandle4890]

When you’re one letter off Mr. Beast, you get Mr. Beat.

[@iammrbeat]

Based

[@TempleofSolomon]

Welcome to your final test, I’m mr Beast but you can drop the s cuz I’ve never missed a beat

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MR WEEEEEEEEEEEEEED

[@andrewvirtue5048]

Mr. Beat, why are the circuit court districts grouped the way they are?

[@therealevilmudbug]

Are you Fruit of the Loom? Because you make the best briefs

[@iammrbeat]

😄 thanks

[@therealevilmudbug]

@@iammrbeat No problem, man. I really like your videos, and your video on the Election of 1800 helped me get through one of my school's tests the other day

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MR BRIEEEEEEEEEEFS

[@fritzhotzonefritz8392]

For proof that civility can exist in politics watch the first televised debate between Kennedy and Nixon. Civility really depends on what society accepts. I believe that the politics of a country is the product of a society and its standards.

[@anthonyperno1348]

Great presentation - you should have mentioned just once (the obvious) that there is a higher bar for private citizens. Certainly, you imply it, but many need to hear it directly. --> Just a retired social studies school teacher mumbling Sorry!

[@iammrbeat]

Good point! And thank you 🙂

[@1brianm7]

if I had nickel for every time Mr. Beat published a video the moment I am learning about that same subject in class, I'd have two nickels, which isn't a lot, but its cool that its happened twice.

[@BladeTNT2018]

Can you do Heart of Atlanta Motel v United States? I'm doing this for a project in U.S government Edit: Nvm now, we already finished with it

[@Barocalypse]

GOD BLESS AMERICA

[@jamesbroughton2199]

As student who loves researching the law, this case particularly earks me. Proving actual malice is essentially impossible in most cases, so publications can knowingly publish lies claiming and “honest mistake”. Also this decision like a lot of warren court decisions, was fabricated to meet political ends and has no basis in the constitutional. I think if you told the founding fathers that the first amendment meant you had to prove “actual malice”, they would’ve laughed at you considering they were known for some pretty notable defamation lawsuits

[@MrJstorm4]

What would a better standard be?

[@Susanviolet3322]

But at the same time ,news media can be sued of all their money if they publish a false claim . So actual malice is what keeps news alive. People make mistakes all the time ….allowing such lawsuits will cripple the news media

[@skybluskyblueify]

This seems pretty relevant for recent fights over just this issue. Hint =F. F.

[@KathleenFeliciano]

Re-learning about this really makes me want a comparison with South Korea

[@bge1234]

Why was the NYT subject to Alabama state law in the first place?

[@zyxwvutsrqponmlkh]

American Broadcasting Companies v. Aereo

[@rodmunch6865]

Lmao truckfulls🤣 How could anybody take that seriously lmao

[@lordlierhook3368]

Hey mr beat if you can add or remove anything from the constitution what would it be?

[@iammrbeat]

I made a video about this: kzbin.info/www/bejne/r4eofKujoMuMic0

[@smkfet]

Very confused by this title. I would expect defamation lawsuits to usually be one plantiff vs one defendant and probably go about 50/50 for winners and losers

[@georgetwine2261]

Perfect timing, I just got my coffee

[@iammrbeat]

Heck yeah

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MRBEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAS

[@johnny1893]

I got a good for you. Alabama laws!

[@matthewhedrichjr.5445]

Hey Mr Beat, can you do do Presidential hairstyles. Btw, favorite fictional character?

[@iammrbeat]

Great idea! Um, favorite fictional character is probably Omar from The Wire

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MRBEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAST

[@nathanandsugar5252]

All the people cheerleading Dominion’s Fox News lawsuit should watch this video.

[@matthewpalevsky6080]

It's clear defamation against Dominion, though. Robert Murdock even admitted so.

[@iammrbeat]

The odds are against them for sure.

[@nathanandsugar5252]

@@matthewpalevsky6080 We’ll see what happens at trial. A lot of cases fall apart in trial.

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MRBEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAST

[@bponterci]

Heck yeah! Duck defamation! Free speech all the way, baby!

[@bponterci]

Well, unless a fake rumor is spread about a person that completely ruins their reputation, I don't think that damages should be paid. We should restrict free speech as little as possible, only in cases where national security or a private citizen's security/reputation is endangered by certain speech. Sorry if my English is incomprehensible.

[@friendlybane]

Mr. Beat, have you made a video about unconstitutional SCOTUS decisions?

[@iammrbeat]

You mean SCOTUS decisions I disagree with?

[@friendlybane]

@@iammrbeat SCOTUS decisions that were later overturned by SCOTUS. In particular, decisions that maybe seemed to have been made with respect to the status quo, as opposed to the Constitution, e.g. SCOTUS upholding a State law banning comedians from using profanity in the 50s and 60s.

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MRBEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAST

[@shirtless6934]

As Fox News (hopefully) is about to find out, meeting the "actual malice" test is not always that difficult.

[@deleted-something]

Pretty much a pr stunt

[@moses4769]

So what was the point of suing the ministers in the ad?

[@iammrbeat]

They were the ones who paid for the ad

[@str.77]

​@@iammrbeat Makes sense.

[@route2070]

Not a fan, while I don't think $500K should javelin been rewarded, if there wasn't truckloads sent to any particular event, that should be retracted. If it isn't fact and opinion, I think that should be stated. So many people are running around talking about "facts" it is hard to tell what is true and what isn't. When pushed as to evidence, many people say they have the rights to their opinions, or that it is true since they believe it to be. I do think that is an issue.

[@noleggin3239]

mr beat? more like MR BEAAAAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSSSTTTTTTTTTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@NYKevin100]

Minor nitpick on your remark about Dominion: Dominion contends that it is not a public figure, and is therefore exempt from the actual malice standard (for non-public figures, the standard is more like a traditional negligence standard, which is much easier to prove). It also contends that it meets the higher standard anyway (which is basically a fallback position, in case the courts disagree with the "not a public figure" line).

[@iammrbeat]

But the judge contends they ARE a public figure

[@NYKevin100]

@@iammrbeat In the event Dominion loses on the actual malice issue, I expect they will appeal under Wolston v. Reader's Digest and related case law. Whether that appeal succeeds is not obvious to me, but they will certainly file it.

[@str.77]

Distibguishing between public figures and others is a violation of equality before the law.

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MRBEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAST

[@roughhabit6496]

If he bought gold with his 500K back then, he could cash it in today for 12.5 M , so where are you getting 5 M from?

[@ryanwaignwright6857]

Brett Farve approved

[@iammrbeat]

haha

[@ryanwaignwright6857]

@@iammrbeat thanks Mr beat! I love your videos. Your a big part of the reason I like history now after not really liking it in school.

[@toadwithtoes]

@@iammrbeat MR BEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAST

[@michaelthebishop5290]

Can't wait for Dominion Voting Systems V Fox News Corporation

[@jtgd]

I’m gonna sue you for being named in this paper’s ad, and take the money for being associated with said paper’s ad

[@ryanbarnes1733]

You gotta buncha half wit parents letting their kids make decisions for us.