Whether the Alabama Courts' grant and affirmance of a summary judgment for Respondents in a state law defamation case conflicts with this Court's decisions

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether the Alabama Courts’ grant and affirmance of a summary judgment for Respondents in a state law defamation case conflicts with this Court’s decisions in Anderson v. Liberty Lobby Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986); Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986); and Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574 (1986) ina case where: (a) Petitioners pleaded First Amendment constitutional defenses in their Motion to Dismiss, Answers to the Complaint, and Opposition to Summary Judgment, (b) genuine issues of material facts existed with respect to whether Petitioner Donald V. Watkins was a professional online "journalist,” within the meaning of New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964), and Respondents were "public figures" at the time of publication, within the meaning of Curtis Publishing Co. v. Butts, 388 U.S. 130 (1967) and Associated Press v. Walker, 388 U.S. 130 (1967), and with respect to the truth of the matters Respondents alleged to be defamatory, and (c) the Alabama Courts applied a simple "negligence" standard for determining liability on the defamation claims, rather than the "actual malice" or "reckless disregard for the truth" standard, which conflicts with this Court’s decision in Curtis Publishing Co. v. Butts and Associated Press v. Walker for "public figures"? 2. Whether the Alabama Courts’ award and affirmance of $1.5 million in "presumed damages" for Respondents in a case where (a) First i Amendment constitutional defenses were asserted, (b) the speech at issue involved matters of public concern, and (c) there was no proof of actual damages, conflict with the express prohibition against “presumed damages” in Gertz v. Robert Welch, 418 U.S. 323 (1974)?