Supreme Court declines to hear Trump donor's challenge to press freedom precedent Justices Thomas and Gorsuch previously questioned the Times v. Sullivan precedent, but they didn't do so on Monday.

The Supreme Court’s landmark press freedom ruling in New York Times v. Sullivan is still safe — for now. On Monday, the court declined to review Republican donor Steve Wynn’s petition that ...

Donald Trump -supporting Republican megadonor Steve Wynn urged the court to revisit the precedent established by 1964’s New York Times v Sullivan, which determined that public figures must prove ...

SCOTUS denies Trump megadonor’s bid to challenge pillar of press freedom Aiming to overturn the landmark libel standard set in New York Times v. Sullivan, Steve Wynn argued the Associated Press didn't ...

Former casino mogul Steve Wynn was handed a defeat on Monday when the U.S. Supreme Court declined to take up his case seeking to challenge the court’s 1964 New York Times vs. Sullivan decision.

On April 28, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear Celanese International Corp.’s challenge to a Federal Circuit decision which found the ...

Steve Wynn, the former casino magnate and now a reputed mega Trump donor, has petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn or at least scale back the New York Times v. Sullivan decision it issued ...

On April 3, the deadline passed for response briefs to challenge a petition for writ of certiorari filed at the U.S. Supreme Court by Bluetooth media upload developer Cellspin Soft. Among the ...

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday turned away a bid by casino mogul Steve Wynn to roll back defamation protections established in the case New York Times v. Sullivan. The standard ...

The Supreme Court turned away Steve Wynn’s bid for the court to consider overturning its 61-year-old New York Times v. Sullivan precedent that has protected journalists from libel lawsuits.

Wynn’s case underscores broader frustrations among public figures who believe the bar for proving defamation is too high, potentially fueling future attempts to challenge this precedent.