Supreme Court Rejects Steve Wynn's Challenge to Defamation Protections

The U.S. Supreme Court has declined Steve Wynn's appeal to overturn defamation protections under the New York Times v. Sullivan case. Wynn sued the Associated Press for allegedly false sexual assault allegations, demanding reconsideration of the 'actual malice' standard that protects media under the First Amendment.

The United States Supreme Court has declined casino mogul Steve Wynn's appeal to challenge defamation protections established by the landmark 1964 New York Times v. Sullivan ruling. Wynn aimed to counter a Nevada court's dismissal of his defamation lawsuit against the Associated Press, which was safeguarded by First Amendment protections for freedom of speech.

Wynn's legal team argued that the publication of false information tarnished the foundation of free speech, following claims of sexual assault dating back to the 1970s. However, Nevada's top court found that Wynn failed to prove the Associated Press acted with 'actual malice' in its reporting.

While conservative justices Thomas and Gorsuch have questioned the validity of the 'actual malice' standard in the age of disinformation, the court remains steadfast in its adherence to current precedent. This decision aligns with previous denials to reconsider the Sullivan standard, despite ongoing critique from public figures like former President Donald Trump.

(With inputs from agencies.)