Supreme Court denies Steve Wynn's attempt to challenge defamation standards

In a significant legal decision announced on March 24, 2025, the United States Supreme Court chose not to review the controversial defamation protections established in the landmark case of New York Times v. Sullivan. This ruling, originally made in 1964, set the standard that public figures must demonstrate 'actual malice' in defamation claims, a standard that can be challenging to meet. The case was brought before the court following a defamation lawsuit filed by Steve Wynn, a major political donor and former CEO of Wynn Resorts, against The Associated Press. Wynn alleged that an AP article published in 2018 falsely accused him of sexual assault dating back to the 1970s, which he vehemently denied. The Nevada Supreme Court had previously dismissed his suit, ruling that he failed to prove the article was published with actual malice. Wynn’s legal team argued before the Supreme Court that the Sullivan standard encourages libelous behavior with little consequence for the press, which they claimed undermines individuals' ability to protect their reputations against false reporting. There has been increasing scrutiny of the defamation standard, particularly from political figures such as former President Donald Trump, who often criticized media protections under Sullivan. The Supreme Court's decision does not come as a surprise, as it follows several prior denials to revisit the Sullivan ruling, despite calls from Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch for reassessment. The denial was issued without comment from the justices on this occasion, and notably, there were no recorded dissents. This outcome underscores the continued importance of the Sullivan case in balancing freedom of the press with protection against defamation, especially for public figures in today's media landscape.