Falwell Vs Larry Flynt Case Study
Jerry Falwell vs. Larry Flynt: The First Amendment on Trial
Robert A. Smolla For my presentation, I reported on the Falwell vs. Flynt lawsuit, which was based upon the extent to which Americans have freedom of expression. An important aspect of this case was the dissimilarity of the two men involved: Jerry Falwell and Larry Flynt. Jerry Falwell was an important religious leader of the time. He was a radio evangelist, leader of a religious group called the moral majority, and voted 2nd most influential person in America (the first being the president). Falwell represented a pure America, a decent society in which its members were committed to moral standards. Larry Flynt was his complete opposite. Flynt was editor of the infamous Hustler …show more content…
Although I understand that it is obvious that information given in a parody, especially one found in a source such as Hustler magazine, cannot be read as the truth, I find it hard to believe that there is not some kind of punishment for publishing such information. I am also bothered by the fact that because the parody states that it is a parody in tiny letters that would not be noticed by a reader simply glancing at the ad Flynt is off the hook. However, the court did support Falwell's claim of emotional distress. I think this is fair because Flynt had obviously published the parody in order to express his feelings toward Falwell. Flynt believed Falwell was a hypocrite, and wanted other people to feel the same way.
Flynt appealed the court's decision because he felt that before Falwell could receive money to compensate his "emotional distress," the actual malice standard set in a previous case (New York Times Co. v. Sullivan) must be met. The court of appeals reaffirmed the ruling of the first court: the ad did not describe actual fact, and therefore was an opinion protected by the First Amendment. The court also stated that the real issue was whether the ad was outrageous enough to represent intentional infliction of emotional
Robert A. Smolla For my presentation, I reported on the Falwell vs. Flynt lawsuit, which was based upon the extent to which Americans have freedom of expression. An important aspect of this case was the dissimilarity of the two men involved: Jerry Falwell and Larry Flynt. Jerry Falwell was an important religious leader of the time. He was a radio evangelist, leader of a religious group called the moral majority, and voted 2nd most influential person in America (the first being the president). Falwell represented a pure America, a decent society in which its members were committed to moral standards. Larry Flynt was his complete opposite. Flynt was editor of the infamous Hustler …show more content…
Although I understand that it is obvious that information given in a parody, especially one found in a source such as Hustler magazine, cannot be read as the truth, I find it hard to believe that there is not some kind of punishment for publishing such information. I am also bothered by the fact that because the parody states that it is a parody in tiny letters that would not be noticed by a reader simply glancing at the ad Flynt is off the hook. However, the court did support Falwell's claim of emotional distress. I think this is fair because Flynt had obviously published the parody in order to express his feelings toward Falwell. Flynt believed Falwell was a hypocrite, and wanted other people to feel the same way.
Flynt appealed the court's decision because he felt that before Falwell could receive money to compensate his "emotional distress," the actual malice standard set in a previous case (New York Times Co. v. Sullivan) must be met. The court of appeals reaffirmed the ruling of the first court: the ad did not describe actual fact, and therefore was an opinion protected by the First Amendment. The court also stated that the real issue was whether the ad was outrageous enough to represent intentional infliction of emotional