Question

How has one specific Supreme Court ruling expanded freedom of speech by limiting a public official’s ability to press for libel?(1 point)
Responses

Adams v. Jefferson determined that pursuing charges of libel is unconstitutional.
Adams v. Jefferson determined that pursuing charges of libel is unconstitutional.

New York Times v. United States determined that libel is allowed in certain instances.
New York Times v. United States determined that libel is allowed in certain instances.

Near v. Minnesota determined that libel is allowed if it serves the interest of the public.
Near v. Minnesota determined that libel is allowed if it serves the interest of the public.

New York Times v. Sullivan determined that actual malice must be proven to pursue charges of libel in the case of a public official.
New York Times v. Sullivan determined that actual malice must be proven to pursue charges of libel in the case of a public official.

Answer 1

New York Times v. Sullivan determined that actual malice must be proven to pursue charges of libel in the case of a public official.

This ruling requires proof that the defendant knew the statement was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth, expanding free speech protections for criticism of public officials.