Criminal libel law unconstitutional

A Nevada libel law under which no one has ever been prosecuted has been declared unconstitutional by a federal judge.

U.S. District Judge Johnnie Rawlinson handed down the decision Tuesday, though both parties in the case had agreed to the ruling.

The Nevada Press Association sued the state in July seeking to have the law removed from the books.

Unlike libel laws in most states, this one differed in that publishing the truth was not an absolute defense unless it was published "for good motive and justifiable reasons."

The law dated to 1911 and made it a gross misdemeanor to publish "malicious defamation ... tending to blacken the memory of the dead, or impeach the honesty, integrity, virtue or reputation, or to publish the natural defects of a living person, or community of persons, or association of persons, and thereby expose them to public contempt or ridicule."

Moreover, editors or managers of companies could be prosecuted for allowing such information to be published in their books or newspapers.

Though the law was obscure, the NPA wanted it stricken from the books as a matter of principle. The state attorney general's office agreed with the NPA.

"We agreed that the law was unconstitutional," said Richard Linstrom, senior deputy attorney general.

NPA Director Kent Lauer said the law, though never used, allowed for the potential to put people in jail for telling the truth.

"It's dangerous to have a law like this on the books," Lauer said. "There's the possibility people will be intimidated from exercising their First Amendment rights. The law's disregard for free speech and free press is offensive and an embarrassment to the people of Nevada."

Rawlinson ruled that the law could not be enforced consistently with the First and 14th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution "as the terms of the statute are not sufficiently precise to place plaintiffs on notice as to what acts might constitute a violation of the statute."

archive