Florida Star v. B. J. F. (1988)
- Docket
- 87-329
- Decided
- 1988-01-01
Summary
Question: May a state impose criminal and civil sanctions on a newspaper for printing lawfully-obtained truthful information found in government records? Conclusion: No. In a 6-3 decision, Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote the majority opinion reversing the lower court. The Supreme Court held that the civil damages imposed on Florida Star violated the First Amendment because the information was lawfully-obtained and truthful. The Court hinted that there may be a situation where a victim’s privacy interest outweighed a newspaper’s First Amendment rights. The Court also held that the Florida law prohibiting the printing of a victim’s name was under-inclusive because it did not limit the spread of a victim’s name through other means. Justice Antonin Scalia wrote a concurrence, stating that the Florida statute was invalid because it did not protect a state interest of the highest order. Justice Byron R. White wrote a dissent, expressing that the majority’s decision departs from past precedent. Justice White also rejected the majority’s assertion that the Florida law was under-inclusive. Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justice Sandra Day O’Connor joined in the dissent.