Whether the Supreme Court should overturn the actual malice standard from New York Times v. Sullivan and whether anti-SLAPP statutes violate the Seventh Amendment right to a civil jury trial

This Court, in New Yorks Times Co. v. Sullivan 1, constitutionalized an actual malice standard for public official defamation plaintiffs. 2 This Court, in Linn v. Plant Guard Workers ,3 extended this innovation to false and defamatory statements made during a labor dispute. The Court then balanced the plaintiff’s right under the Petition’s clause with the actual malice standard .4 Compelled by this Court’s constitutional decisions in Sullivan and Linn , states, like California, have incorporated the actual malice standard into their anti -SLAPP statutes. State courts are split over the application of the actual malice standard’s clear and convincing evidence burden to plaintiffs in anti -SLAPP cases and whether it violates a plaintiff’s right to a civil jury trial. These are the questions presented : 1. Whether this Court should overturn Sullivan ’s actual malice standard. 2. Whether the Seventh Amendment’s right to a jury trial is incorporated agai nst the States, and, if yes, whether the application of the clear and convincing actual malice standard at the early anti -SLAPP stage of litigation violates a plaintiff’s right to a civil jury trial. 1 376 U.S. 254 (1964). 2 Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. v. Greenmoss Builders, Inc. , 472 U.S. 749, 766 (1985) (White, J., concurring in judgment). 3 383 U.S. 53 (1966). 4 McDonald v. Smith , 472 U.S. 479 (1985). ii 3. Does an interpretation of the anti -SLAPP statute that allows for the dismissal of a defamation claim without evaluating whether the plaintiff has met the actual malice standard violate the plaintiff’s First Amendment right to petition the government through access to the courts? 4. Whether a state court violates a party’s Fourteenth Amendment right to due process under the United States Constitution when the state court summarily extinguishes that party’s lawsuit without considering that party’s evidence.