Opinion

Thomas and Gorsuch blasted for not understanding history of media protection

Supreme Court Justice Neil M. Gorsuch last summer signaled his willingness to revisit the landmark media-protection precedent New York Times v. Sullivan. It’s not clear, wrote the justice, “how well Sullivan and all its various extensions serve its intended goals in today’s changed world.”

That made for two justices — including Clarence Thomas, an advocate for overturning Sullivan — gunning for a fresh look at the case. Various commentators opined on the development, and then people moved on to other topics.