Texas Constitution:Article I, Section 8: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Texas Constitution:Article I, Section 8 (view source)

Revision as of 11:56, July 5, 2023

5 bytes removed ,  July 5, 2023
no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 21: Line 21:
* ''Ex parte Tucker'', 220 S.W. 75, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/220_SW_75.pdf#page=2 76] (Tex. 1920) ("The theory of the provision is that no man or set of men are to be found, so infallible in mind and character as to be clothed with an absolute authority of determining what other men may think, speak, write or publish; that freedom of speech is essential to the nature of a free state; that the ills suffered from its abuse are less than would be imposed by its suppression; and, therefore, that every person shall be left at liberty to speak his mind on all subjects, and for the abuse of the privilege be responsible in civil damages and subject to the penalties of the criminal law.")
* ''Ex parte Tucker'', 220 S.W. 75, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/220_SW_75.pdf#page=2 76] (Tex. 1920) ("The theory of the provision is that no man or set of men are to be found, so infallible in mind and character as to be clothed with an absolute authority of determining what other men may think, speak, write or publish; that freedom of speech is essential to the nature of a free state; that the ills suffered from its abuse are less than would be imposed by its suppression; and, therefore, that every person shall be left at liberty to speak his mind on all subjects, and for the abuse of the privilege be responsible in civil damages and subject to the penalties of the criminal law.")


* ''McArthur v. State'', 57 S.W. 847, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/Vol_057_SWR_847.pdf#page=3 849] (Tex.Crim.App. 1900) ("We do not understand this article of our Code to contravene the provisions of our constitution on this subject (see Bill of Rights, § 8) . . . . This provision makes the jurors simply the judges of the law under the direction of the court, as in other cases. In other cases the jury take the law from the court, and are required to be governed thereby; and we understand the constitution and the statute to mean the same thing, and it was never intended that the jury, with reference to libel, should construe the law for themselves and without direction from the court.")
* ''McArthur v. State'', 57 S.W. 847, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/057_SW_847.pdf#page=3 849] (Tex.Crim.App. 1900) ("We do not understand this article of our Code to contravene the provisions of our constitution on this subject (see Bill of Rights, § 8) . . . . This provision makes the jurors simply the judges of the law under the direction of the court, as in other cases. In other cases the jury take the law from the court, and are required to be governed thereby; and we understand the constitution and the statute to mean the same thing, and it was never intended that the jury, with reference to libel, should construe the law for themselves and without direction from the court.")


* ''A. H. Belo & Co. v. Wren'', 63 Tex. 686, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/63_Tex._686.pdf#page=37 722] (1884) ("The publisher of defamatory matter is exempted from responsibility in such cases, because the demands of public policy for the publication outweigh all considerations requiring the protection of private reputation in the particular case. The public are not regarded as having such an interest in proceedings embodying defamatory matter as will outweigh the necessity of protecting the character of individuals, unless they are proceedings of a legislative or judicial character. Cooley's Const. Law, 568; Townshend on Libel, 411; Sanford ''v''. Bennett, 24 N.Y. 20.")
* ''A. H. Belo & Co. v. Wren'', 63 Tex. 686, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/63_Tex._686.pdf#page=37 722] (1884) ("The publisher of defamatory matter is exempted from responsibility in such cases, because the demands of public policy for the publication outweigh all considerations requiring the protection of private reputation in the particular case. The public are not regarded as having such an interest in proceedings embodying defamatory matter as will outweigh the necessity of protecting the character of individuals, unless they are proceedings of a legislative or judicial character. Cooley's Const. Law, 568; Townshend on Libel, 411; Sanford ''v''. Bennett, 24 N.Y. 20.")
Retrieved from "https://texaslegalguide.com/Special:MobileDiff/4320"

Navigation menu