In 1960, The New York Times ran a full-page advertisement paid for by civil rights activists. The ad described an “unprecedented wave of terror” by the police of Montgomery, Alabama, against civil rights protesters. It stated that the police had assaulted nonviolent protesters with shotguns and tear gas and had padlocked a dining hall to starve them into submission. The ad also accused the Montgomery police of bombing the home of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and unjustly arresting him seven times. Most of the ad’s statements were true, but a few were not. 

L.B. Sullivan was Montgomery’s police commissioner. Although the ad did not mention him by name, Sullivan argued that the accusations hurt his reputation because he was head of the police. He sued The New York Times under Alabama’s law on libel per se. 

An Alabama court agreed with Sullivan, awarding him damages of $500,000. The Supreme Court of Alabama affirmed. The New York Times appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing that the ad was protected by the First Amendment and the evidence did not support such an award.

Questions:

1. Does the First Amendment protect those who criticize public officials?

2. What does a public official have to prove in order to recover damages for a defamatory falsehood relating to his official conduct? 

3. What is actual malice?

4. What is libel per se?