[EL] Fact-checking

[Robbin Stewart]

*As for government bureaucrats deciding the relative truthiness of
political statements, bring it on.  Speaking for my own selfish interest,
that's a goldmine of litigation in the making.*
*Forward,*
*First Amendment Ben

*I have a question for the list about damages. Assume that a state has
created a Bureau of Truth, somewhat like Ohio's, that your client is a
candidate, that the Bureau finds one of her statements untrue, but they are
provably wrong. Your client wants to sue them for damages under the First
Amendment and the (hypothetical but typical) state constitution. I'm asking
a descriptive question, not a normative one. Are damages available? Does
the bureau have absolute or qualified immunity? If QI, can it be overcome
here? Is the Bureau a person who can be sued under 1983? If not, what other
statutes can be used? Can one assert a constitutional tort as in*
Bivens?*I have found that injunctions and declaratory judgments have
little
deterrent effect on rogue agencies.

I had an interesting episode of law-checking a Bloomberg article this
morning.
http://ballots.blogspot.com/2012/09/hi.html

My further thoughts on this thread are here:
http://ballots.blogspot.com/2012/09/i-am-sitting-in-buffalo-library-killing.html




On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 2:52 PM, Svoboda, Brian (Perkins Coie) <
BSvoboda at perkinscoie.com> wrote:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120928/cf78385e/attachment.html>