Abstract
The Supreme Court's decision striking down a verdict for the Rev. Jerry Falwell in an intentional infliction of emotional distress suit against Hustler Magazine was widely praised as a major victory for freedom of expression. Careful examination of the decision and subsequent cases in the lower courts, however, reveals that the Hustler decision is unclear and limited. It has not dealt decisively with plaintiffs' use of alternative theories of liability to avoid otherwise insurmountable First Amendment barriers to actions for libel or invasion of privacy. The lower courts have done a more effective job of resolving the issue without Hustler.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
