Murder the truth Fear, the First Amendment, and a secret campaign to protect the powerful

David Enrich, 1979-

Book - 2025

"It seemed like a throwaway line in a forgettable opinion: In 2019, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas raised the prospect of challenging the legendary Warren Court decision New York Times v. Sullivan. Though hardly a household name, Sullivan is one of the most consequential free speech decisions, ever. Fundamental to the creation of the modern media as we know it, it has enabled journalists and writers all over the country-from top national publications to revered local newspapers to independent bloggers-to pursue the truth aggressively and hold the wealthy, powerful, and corrupt to account. Thomas's words were a warning-the public awakening of an idea that had been fomenting on the conservative fringe for years. With that opi...nion, Thomas took mainstream the ongoing, secret efforts of right-wing politicians, activist lawyers, and moneyed elites who had been seeking to overturn Sullivan in order to muzzle the media and their critics. From the Florida statehouse to small town New Hampshire to Donald Trump himself, this movement consists of powerful individuals who believe they should be above scrutiny-and are using threats, subterfuge, and legal warfare to get their way. In this masterwork of investigative reporting, David Enrich, New York Times Business Investigations Editor, traces the roots and reach of this new threat to our modern democracy. Laying bare the stakes of losing our most sacrosanct rights, Murder the Truth is a story about power-the way it's used by those who have it, and the lengths they will go to avoid it being questioned"-- Provided by publisher.

Saved in:

2nd Floor New Shelf Show me where

342.730853/Enrich
1 / 1 copies available
Location Call Number   Status
2nd Floor New Shelf 342.730853/Enrich (NEW SHELF) Checked In
Subjects
Genres
Informational works
Nonfiction novels
Published
New York, NY : Mariner Books 2025.
Language
English
Main Author
David Enrich, 1979- (author)
Edition
First edition
Physical Description
x, 323 pages ; 24 cm
Bibliography
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN
9780063372900
  • Author's Note
  • Prologue: A Panicked Phone Call
  • Part I. The Consensus
  • 1. Clarence Thomas's Clearest Answer
  • 2. The Fighter Pilot
  • 3. Funding Evil
  • Part II. The Shift
  • 4. Trump's Bizarre Vow
  • 5. Starting a Revolution
  • 6. Vanquishing the Dark Side
  • 7. A Couple of Workhorses
  • 8. A Form of Extremism
  • 9. Coordinated Campaigns of Harassment
  • 10. Clarence Thomas Changes his Mind
  • Part III. The Movement
  • 11. The Oligarchs' Revenge
  • 12. Triggering a Federal Judge
  • 13. A Second Justice
  • 14. Stay Out of the Kitchen
  • 15. The Slur
  • 16. Just the Beginning
  • 17. The Case of the Century
  • 18. Gunning for Sullivan
  • Epilogue: A Misogynist and a Snake
  • Acknowledgments
  • Notes
  • Index
Review by Booklist Review

With the rise of an archconservative political and judicial class, long-held legal rulings are under severe scrutiny, none more so than the landmark case of New York Times v. Sullivan that protects free speech in the press. In 2016, then-candidate Trump vowed to strengthen the country's libel laws, a position that was soon championed by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Trump's second administration is doubling down on that rhetoric. Enrich, the business investigations editor for the New York Times, elucidates the complex legal challenges to fact-based journalism brought against long-established media and independent outlets by hungrily litigious politicians and corporate executives. Allegedly aggrieved parties' clarion call of "defamation" becomes the J'accuse! of our times, with the goal of silencing the press pursued everywhere from rural school boards to mahogany-paneled corporate suites. The establishment of a free press is foundational to America, yet the onslaught of lawsuits that challenge bedrock notions of accuracy and intent portends a tactics of judicial interpretations designed to strip the media of its ability to function. With thousands of publications now defunct, Enrich's probing analysis brings crucial attention to this endangered tenet of a functioning democracy.

From Booklist, Copyright (c) American Library Association. Used with permission.
Review by Publisher's Weekly Review

New York Times editor Enrich (Servants of the Damned) offers a chilling deep dive into "a largely under-the-radar legal movement that is weaponizing obscure field of libel law." Ever since the Supreme Court's unanimous 1964 decision in New York Times Company v. Sullivan, plaintiffs classified as public figures have been required to prove that individuals or entities they sue for libel acted with "knowledge that was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not." The impact of that ruling, Enrich explains, was to allow journalists to "investigate and write about those in the public sphere, even if they accidentally got a fact wrong." But in recent years Sullivan has come under attack as libel suits have been brought, or threatened, against newspapers, both local and national, in a concerted right-wing effort to give a conservative Supreme Court an opportunity to overrule Sullivan, according to Enrich. He profiles those caught up in the lawsuits, including Colorado journalist Conrad Swanson, whose investigation into public safety concerns about a new residential development were stymied when his newspaper was threatened with a libel action, as well as those pursuing Sullivan's demise--like billionaire Peter Thiel, who covertly financed a libel lawsuit against Gawker that led to the website's shuttering, and the growing "clique of high-powered lawyers who... specialize in attacking journalists" on behalf of the powerful. It's an unsettling look at a dire threat to democracy. (Mar.)

(c) Copyright PWxyz, LLC. All rights reserved
Review by Kirkus Book Review

A searching account of the modern right-wing push to silence criticism by suing for libel. Wrote jurist Robert Bork in 1984, libel suits "may threaten the public and constitutional interest in free, and frequently rough, discussion." That rough discussion, notesNew York Times business investigative reporter Enrich, has lately included revelations that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is the recipient of hundreds of thousands of dollars in unreported gifts and that Justice Samuel Alito's home was flying "a flag associated with the January 6 uprising…just as he was poised to hear a high--stakes case about the attempted insurrection." Knowing of both scandals, Enrich holds, is most definitely in the public interest--and precisely the sort of thing that Alito and Thomas' fellow ideologues are trying to suppress through libel lawsuits that may or may not be mere nuisances but that would drain the resources of most small publications, dissuading investigation. Enrich reminds us that current libel laws require proof that a defending party had "actually malicious" intent, a requirement that dates only to a Supreme Court ruling in 1964; in Britain the standard of proof is much lower, which explains why so much "libel tourism" takes place there, even asNew York Times v. Sullivan provided a bulwark protecting the press. As recently as 2010, Congress unanimously passed a law "celebrating the country's commitment to defending Americans from weaponized libel claims." But then came a "freshening stream," as Bork put it, of claims funded by wealthy right-wing sponsors that, in one notable instance, crushed the anti-establishment Gawker website. That stream is quickening with the resurgence of Donald Trump, who has promised to alter libel laws "so when they [i.e., journalists] write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money." A revealing look at a campaign intended to stifle the First Amendment in favor of those in power. Copyright (c) Kirkus Reviews, used with permission.

Copyright (c) Kirkus Reviews, used with permission.