The Shreveport Times carried the following letter to the editor:
Jason Waltman
Shreveport
John Maginnis'
analysis regarding the lawsuit filed by Royal Alexander demonstrates a
complete lack of legal acumen. Maginnis asserts Alexander filed a
lawsuit seeking a temporary restraining order to cease the broadcast of
a television commercial that contained lies without a working knowledge
of the First Amendment. On the contrary, Alexander knew the courts were
hesitant to enjoin false or slanderous political advertisements;
however, many of the cases contained strong dissenting opinions.
In 1987, Louisiana Supreme Court Justice Cole wrote: "It is my view
that false publications are not constitutionally protected and
injunctive relief as to future publication is proper." Justice Cole
correctly asserted the use of a known lie as a tool is at odds with the
premises of democratic government. Subsequently, former Louisiana
Supreme Court Justice Dennis wrote a concurring opinion which implied
support for injunctive relief if a plaintiff could prove actual malice.
The
law is not static. It evolves as courts recognize past precedents are
no longer workable or, as in the case of school segregation, the courts
determine that the existing law is in conflict with our constitutional
democracy. To attack a person who argues for a change in the law by
asserting that person does not have a working understanding of said law
is overly simplistic and demonstrates an ignorance of the role of the
courts in our democracy.
Recent Comments