Facts On February 8th, 1974, members of the Mentor High School wrestling team in Cleveland, Ohio were hospitalized when a fight broke out in a wrestling match against Maple Heights High School. Mike Milkovich, the wrestling coach of Maple Heights High School, outwardly criticized the referees for a series of bad calls during the game, causing tension between the two teams. Because of the coach’s rude comments, Maple Heights was subsequently put on probation for one year and could not participate in the state’s wrestling tournament. The Ohio High School Athletic Association (OHSAA) decided this decision. Maple Heights petitioned the hearing, saying that they were denied due process. A second hearing was permitted and the superintendent, Donald Scott and Milkovich testified and obtained a temporary injunction from the previous ruling. Following the second hearing, a sportswriter and reporter for the Lorain Journal, Ted Diadium, published an article accusing Michael Milkovich and Don Scott of lying under oath in a judicial proceeding in order to escape discipline from the state high school athletic association. Scott and Milkovich sued the Lorain Journal for defamation in Ohio state court in two separate suits. In Milkovich’s case, the trial court had a direct verdict, finding that there was no evidence of actual malice. However, a state appeals court reversed, saying that there was adequate evidence to go to the jury and the newspaper was not granted further appeals. The case then went back to the trial court, which said that the article was constitutionally protected opinion and dismissed the suit. The Lorain Journal appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court, which reversed and the state high court decided that the statements were indeed true but could lead to a defamation suit. Soon after, the Ohio Supreme Court reversed itself based on the suit brought by Superintendent, Donald Scott that determined that the article was constitutionally protected. Milkovich then appealed to the United States Supreme Court, arguing that the article was not constitutionally protected and the Lorain Journal argued that opinions are protected under the constitution.

Issue To what extent can an opinion be expressed without being considered libelous (written defamation)? Should there be a special privilege in the First Amendment (freedom of press) that allows for opinions?

The Holding No, the court decided that there is no necessity for a separate opinion privilege within the First Amendment that would limit the purpose of the defamation laws.

The Rationale The United States Supreme Court decided that no matter if something is simply an opinion, it could create just as much reputational damage as a statement can. Therefore, they rejected that a separate opinion privilege exists against libel. For the majority of citizens, the First Amendment, which guarantees freedom of speech, already offers sufficient protection without establishing a new opinion privilege. The court decided that if a plaintiff declares defamation, they must prove that the statement both implies an assertion of fact and is “sufficiently factual to be susceptible of being proved true or false.” Taking this standard into consideration, the court determined that there was a question of fact as to if the statements were actually defamatory. Although most justices found this to be true, Justice Marshall and Justice Brennan thought differently. Justice Brennan argued that the reporter, Diadiun, was upset about the court’s reversal of the OHSAA’s decision and was irritably assuming what led to it by blaming Milkovich. He claimed that Diadium had only speculated what had happened with much less actual knowledge of the facts.