William J. Brennan, Jr.

“ The 'good motives' of the publisher can be no more relevant in the context of 'public men' than in the context of criticism of 'public officials.' See Garrison, supra. The court added that the Post could show in mitigation of punitive damages that 'it in good faith relied upon certain matters which had come to its attention.' This makes crystal clear that the standard announced authorized the jury to award punitive damages even though it found that the Post had in good faith relied on matters which had come to its attention. The charge undoubtedly fails to comport with New York Times. ”

“ That the evidence might support a verdict under New York Times cannot justify our taking from the jury the function of determining, under proper instructions, whether the New York Times standard has been met. ”

“ It said, for example, that ' (a) publication may be so extravagant in its denunciation and so vituperative in its character as to justify an inference of malice,' and that 'proof that the plaintiff did demand a retraction but that the defendant failed to retract the article may be considered by you on the question of punitive damages.' But ' (d) ebate on public issues will not be uninhibited if the speaker must run the risk that it will be proved in court that he spoke out of hatred ”