Supreme Court to overturn a historic decision that has set the American standard for libel law β and been a bedrock of free press protections β for the past 60 years.
Wynn is seeking the review of New York Times vs. Media law experts say the consequences would be significant if the high court reversed the ruling. In February , the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department held a news conference revealing that two women filed complaints against Wynn β one in Las Vegas, the other in Chicago β decades apart. Wynn, 83, says the claims in those police reports are false.
He has denied all sexual misconduct allegations made against him. The page petition for a writ of certiorari was filed Jan. Wynn has said he ceased being a public figure when he left Wynn Resorts in February , after The Wall Street Journal, the Las Vegas Review-Journal and other publications reported allegations that he had sexually harassed and coerced some of his female employees.
Cook said Wynn previously has pushed back on the right of the press to accurately report on him from privileged public records. Attorneys representing Wynn in pressured the Review-Journal against publishing allegations, reported from part of a federal lawsuit, that he coerced a Mirage waitress into sex.
Public figures are held to a different standard for good reason. Supreme Court was called on at various times during the 20th century to explain the scope of First Amendment protections provided to the press and the public when a plaintiff decides to sue over something written or said.
