[Leaf] Leaf, an employee of the California Department of Forestry, insisted on signing inter-office memoranda with his name and the initials "FOJT", an abbreviation for his church "Followers of Jesus' Trees". Leaf's supervisor, Milo, told Leaf there was a rule prohibiting displays of religion at work and insisted that Leaf cease placing the initials of his church on government paperwork. When Leaf refused to follow the work rule, he was terminated.
-After his termination, Leaf returned to his office to pack his belongings. He uploaded a message on the Department's website, which stated that Milo was a thief and has stolen thousands of dollars from the State of California. Milo, who had not stolen money from the State, later sued Leaf for defamation. How would a court likely rule?
A) For Leaf because he has an absolute right to free speech under the First Amendment.
B) For Leaf because the rational-basis test applies.
C) For Leaf because he did not use any lewd, profane, or obscene words.
D) For Milo because the First Amendment does not protect defamatory speech.
E) For Milo, but only if Leaf also used fighting words.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The court would likely rule for Milo because the First Amendment does not protect defamatory speech. Leaf's statement accusing Milo of theft, without basis, constitutes defamation, and the First Amendment does not shield individuals from consequences of making false statements that harm another's reputation.

[Leaf] Leaf, an Employee of the California Department of Forestry