If Clinton were to sue ABC, could he seek an injunction against them

[madinmaryland]

to prevent them from televising the Mock-u-drama?

[Monkeyman]

1. The Right would say what do you got to hide

[helderheid]

2. I'd answer "The bullshit you keep trying to feed me"

[Imagevision]

3. It would be nice if Bill could pull that off on dramatization

[dflprincess]

4. Would that be prior restraint?

Or does that only apply when it's the government trying to stop the media from printing or broadcasting something (Like the New York Times and the Pentagon Papers)?

[pat_k]

5. I want to see Clinton bring a libel action. . .

We in the center are great at complaining, but rarely actually DO SOMETHING.

Well, I for one am sick of it. I hope they don't stop with complaint, and actually bring a legal action.

If there is a high profile case (and a lawsuit by a our last legimately elected President can't be ignored) that exposes reality (the opposite of their fantasies), it doen't matter if people see it. Tearing it apart would be all the more effective.

But if they just argue and complain, and don't take legal action, they won't make a dent.

For those, like me, who confuse slander and libel, this from wikipedia:

In law, defamation is a right of action for communicating statements that may harm an individual's reputation or character. The common law origins of defamation lie in the torts of slander (harmful statement in a transitory form, esp. speech) and libel (harmful statement in a fixed medium, esp. writing but also a picture, sign, or electronic broadcast), each which give a common law rights of action.

[onenote]

6. he could seek a permanent injunction, but not a preliminary one

The law isn't completely clear, but courts generally will not grant a preliminary injunction against speech based on an allegation of libel (on the grounds that it would be a prior restraint). While a permanent injuction, based on a finding that the material is libelous (and thus unprotected) is not outside the realm of possibility, the problem in this instance is that there probably isn't time to get a permanent injunction before Sunday. To compound matters, ABC would (as it currently seems to be doing) take the position that the program isn't "finished" (ie its still being edited). One way around that would be to argue that ABC has distributed a version of the program to certain groups and individual and whatever the final version might turn out to be, the version that was distributed was libelous and any further distribution or dissmemination of a version containing the libelous material should be enjoined. Again, the tough part would be getting a ruling before Sunday.

[madinmaryland]

7. Thanks for the explanation.

That was the type of information I was looking for when I posted it.