New York Times v. Sullivan : Civil Rights, Libel Law, and the Free Press (Landmark Law Cases and American Society)

個数:

New York Times v. Sullivan : Civil Rights, Libel Law, and the Free Press (Landmark Law Cases and American Society)

  • 在庫がございません。海外の書籍取次会社を通じて出版社等からお取り寄せいたします。
    通常6~9週間ほどで発送の見込みですが、商品によってはさらに時間がかかることもございます。
    重要ご説明事項
    1. 納期遅延や、ご入手不能となる場合がございます。
    2. 複数冊ご注文の場合は、ご注文数量が揃ってからまとめて発送いたします。
    3. 美品のご指定は承りかねます。

    ●3Dセキュア導入とクレジットカードによるお支払いについて
  • 【入荷遅延について】
    世界情勢の影響により、海外からお取り寄せとなる洋書・洋古書の入荷が、表示している標準的な納期よりも遅延する場合がございます。
    おそれいりますが、あらかじめご了承くださいますようお願い申し上げます。
  • ◆画像の表紙や帯等は実物とは異なる場合があります。
  • ◆ウェブストアでの洋書販売価格は、弊社店舗等での販売価格とは異なります。
    また、洋書販売価格は、ご注文確定時点での日本円価格となります。
    ご注文確定後に、同じ洋書の販売価格が変動しても、それは反映されません。
  • 製本 Hardcover:ハードカバー版/ページ数 232 p.
  • 言語 ENG
  • 商品コード 9780700618026
  • DDC分類 342.730853

Full Description

Illuminating a classic case from the turbulent civil rights era of the 1960s, two of America's foremost legal historians--Kermit Hall and Melvin Urofsky--provide a compact and highly readable updating of one of the most memorable decisions in the Supreme Court's canon.

When the New York Timespublished an advertisement that accused Alabama officials of wilfully abusing civil rights activists, Montgomery police commissioner Lester Sullivan filed suit for defamation. Alabama courts, citing factual errors in the ad, ordered the Times to pay half a million dollars in damages. The Times appealed to the Supreme Court, which had previously deferred to the states on libel issues. The justices, recognising that Alabama's application of libel law threatened both the nation's free press and equal rights for African Americans, unanimously sided with the Times.

As memorably recounted twenty years ago in Anthony Lewis's Make No Law, the 1964 decision profoundly altered defamation law, which the Court declared must not hinder debate on public issues even if it includes ""vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials."" The decision also introduced a new First Amendment test: a public official cannot recover damages for libel unless he proves that the statement was made with the knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false.

Hall and Urofsky, however, place a new emphasis on this iconic case. Whereas Lewis's book championed freedom of the press, the authors here provide a stronger focus on civil rights and southern legal culture. They convey to readers the urgency of the civil rights movement and the vitriolic anger it inspired in the Deep South. Their insights place this landmark case within a new and enlightening frame.

最近チェックした商品