City officials from Clarksdale, Mississippi, are dropping a lawsuit against a local newspaper following nationwide outcry over their claims that basic reporting and opinion journalism amounted to libel.
Earlier this month, The Clarksdale Press Register published an editorial blasting city officials for conducting business in secrecy. Without public notice or direct notifications to local media, city commissioners had held a meeting and advanced a measure to raise taxes on alcohol, tobacco and marijuana.
The newspaper’s editorial board agreed with the proposal, but condemned the city for advancing the measure without transparency.
“Why did the City of Clarksdale fail to go to the public with details about this idea before it sent a resolution to the Mississippi Legislature seeking a two-percent tax on alcohol, marijuana and tobacco?” the editorial board wrote, adding that the city commissioners “stumped their toe” on the matter and “made us suspicious” of their actions.
In response to the paper’s editorial, the city sought an injunction on the article, and state Judge Crystal Wise Martin ordered The Press Register to delete the editorial from its website — an extraordinary move that many press freedom advocates said was a violation of the First Amendment.
“It’s hard to imagine a more unconstitutional order than one compelling a newspaper to take down an editorial critical of the government,” said Seth Sterns, director of advocacy for the Freedom of the Press Foundation.
Following the ruling, the city planned to sue the paper for libel. However, the city reversed course this week, likely due to an outpouring of support for the paper from free press advocates and the public. U.S. caselaw on libel has also established that, while public figures can sue publications (if they can prove that a false statement was made with actual malice), governments cannot do so.
The decision to drop the lawsuit came in a vote on Monday by city commissioners. The board also voted to call on Martin to reverse her order and to allow the paper to republish the editorial online.
Wyatt Emmerich, president of Emmerich Newspapers, which owns The Press Register, celebrated the action.
“It’s still very, very wrong what they did and it awakened the entire First Amendment community nationally, which is very encouraging,” Emmerich said. “I’m really excited to see how all these people rallied around us to protect our rights.”
Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) attorney David Rubin also heralded the city’s reversal, but noted that their previous actions warranted continued examination.
“While we are relieved the city has voted to drop its vindictive lawsuit, it doesn’t unring this bell,” Rubin said. “The Press Register is exploring its options to ensure that the city refrains from blatantly unconstitutional censorship in the future.”
Josh Bleisch, another attorney at FIRE, condemned the city’s actions, warning of the impact that attacks on political speech could have on everyday Americans.
“If asking whether a politician might be corrupt was libel, virtually every American would be bankrupt,” Bleish said. “For good reason, courts have long held that political speech about government officials deserves the widest latitude and the strongest protection under the First Amendment. That’s true from the White House all the way down to your local councilman.”
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today during our fundraiser. We have until midnight tonight to add 132 new monthly donors. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.