4 ms·
Without descending too deeply into American domestic politics, I'm skeptical of that given his stated desire to expand the scope of slander and libel laws. It'
by livueta 7y ago
Without descending too deeply into American domestic politics, I'm skeptical of that given his stated desire to expand the scope of slander and libel laws.
It's really easy to end up in a "speech for me, not for thee" kind of scenario, especially when that reveling is generally more polemical than forensic.
- xanthrax 7y agoSimilar to how for years in the UK you had super injunctions (less so now) that could be requested but they weren't cheap.
- merpnderp 7y agoI understand why public figures have no recourse to slander and lies, but it doesn’t make it fair. It’s only just in that protecting the powerless against armies of lawyers from the powerful, is the best we can do. But allowing damaging lies to go unpunished is certainly a black eye for justice.