Question

Chief Justice Rehnquist's majority opinion in Milkovich v. Lorain Journal said four existing constitutional doctrines protect speech adequately without creating additional protection for opinion. Which of the following is NOT one of the doctrines Rehnquist mentioned?

a) Actual malice.
b) Fair comment privilege.
c) The First Amendment.
d) Neutral reportage privilege.

Answer 1

The doctrine NOT mentioned by Chief Justice Rehnquist in Milkovich v. Lorain Journal is d) Neutral reportage privilege. The doctrines mentioned are actual malice, fair comment privilege, and the First Amendment.

Step-by-step explanation:

Chief Justice Rehnquist's majority opinion in Milkovich v. Lorain Journal discussed four existing constitutional doctrines that offer adequate protection for speech, thereby negating the need for creating additional protections for opinions. These doctrines are:

• Actual malice
• Fair comment privilege
• The First Amendment

The one option that is NOT mentioned by Rehnquist as an existing doctrine in this context is:

• d) Neutral reportage privilege

The New York Times v. Sullivan case established the actual malice standard, which requires public figures to prove that false statements were made with malice or reckless disregard for the truth. The First Amendment broadly protects freedom of speech and press, while the concept of fair comment allows for criticisms of public figures as long as they are not made with malice.