No. 22-1168

Center for Medical Progress, et al. v. Planned Parenthood Federation of America, et al.

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2023-06-02
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Amici (5) Experienced Counsel
Tags: civil-rights creative-pleading due-process emotional-distress first-amendment free-speech general-application-law public-speech publication standing tort tort-liability
Key Terms:
FirstAmendment JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2023-09-26
Related Cases: 22-1147 (Vide) 22-1159 (Vide) 22-1160 (Vide)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does the First Amendment protect defendants against tort claims arising out of speech or expression?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED The circuit courts are divided over when the First Amendment protects defendants against tort claims arising out of speech or expression. In Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell, 485 U.S. 46 (1988) this Court applied First Amendment scrutiny to intentional infliction of emotional distress claims premised on the defendant’s speech. Id. at 52-53. In Cohen v. Cowles Media Co., 501 U.S. 663 (1991), however, the Court stated that “generally applicable laws do not offend the First Amendment simply because their enforcement against the press has incidental effects on its ability to gather and report the news.” Id. at 669. The lower courts have struggled to reconcile Hustler and Cowles, leading to acknowledged division about when parties may be held liable in tort for speech or expression that has not been shown to be false. The question presented is: Does First Amendment scrutiny apply when a plaintiff's claim for damages is based on a defendant’s public speech, even if a plaintiff sues under a law of general application or attempts through creative pleading to recharacterize publication damages as something else?

Docket Entries

2023-10-02
Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by Foundation for Moral Law DENIED.
2023-10-02
Petition DENIED.
2023-09-06
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/26/2023.
2023-09-06
Reply of petitioners Center for Medical Progress, et al. filed. (Distributed)
2023-08-22
Brief of respondents Planned Parenthood Federation of America, et al. in opposition filed.
2023-07-03
2023-07-03
Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by Foundation for Moral Law.
2023-07-03
2023-07-03
2023-06-21
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including August 23, 2023.
2023-06-20
Motion to extend the time to file a response from July 3, 2023 to August 23, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
2023-05-30

Attorneys

Center for Medical Progress; Biomax Procurement Services, Llc; and David Daleiden
Jeffrey Matthew HarrisConsovoy McCarthy PLLC, Petitioner
Jeffrey Matthew HarrisConsovoy McCarthy PLLC, Petitioner
Coalition Of Free Speech, Whistle-Blower Protections, And Animal-Advocacy Organizations
Gregg P. LeslieASU College of Law First Amendment Clinic, Amicus
Gregg P. LeslieASU College of Law First Amendment Clinic, Amicus
Ethics and Public Policy Center
Daniel Nolan NightingaleWheeler Trigg O'Donnell, Amicus
Daniel Nolan NightingaleWheeler Trigg O'Donnell, Amicus
Foundation for Moral Law
John Allen EidsmoeFoundation for Moral Law, Amicus
John Allen EidsmoeFoundation for Moral Law, Amicus
Judicial Watch, Inc.
Meredith Leigh Di LibertoJudicial Watch, Inc., Amicus
Meredith Leigh Di LibertoJudicial Watch, Inc., Amicus
National Right to Life Committee
James Bopp Jr.The Bopp Law Firm, PC, Amicus
James Bopp Jr.The Bopp Law Firm, PC, Amicus
Sheila Ann GreenShelia Green, Esq, Amicus
Sheila Ann GreenShelia Green, Esq, Amicus
Planned Parenthood Fed'n of Am., et al.
William Collins PerdueArnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, Respondent
William Collins PerdueArnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, Respondent