Previous | Next

§ 11. Liberty of press and speech; libel. The liberty of the press shall be inviolate; and all persons may freely speak, write or publish their sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of such rights; and in all civil or criminal actions for libel, the truth may be given in evidence to the jury, and if it shall appear that the alleged libelous matter was published for justifiable ends, the accused party shall be acquitted.

History: Adopted by convention, July 29, 1859; ratified by electors, October 4, 1859; L. 1861, p. 48.

Law Review and Bar Journal References:

Defamation of private individuals in the reporting of judicial proceedings, Murray E. Anderson, 15 W.L.J. 144, 147 (1976).

Swift Currents of Change in the Law of Defamation, M. C. Slough, 45 J.B.A.K. 17, 30 (1976).

Independent But Inadequate: State Constitutions and Protection of Freedom of Expression, Todd F. Simon, 33 K.L.R. 305 (1985).

Interpreting the State Constitution: A Survey and Assessment of Current Methodology, Steve McAllister, 35 K.L.R. 593, 606 (1987).

Compelled Cost Disclosure of Grass Roots Lobbying Expenses: Necessary Government Voyeurism or Chilled Political Speech? Ron Smith, 6 Kan. J.L. & Pub. Pol'y, No. 1, 115 (1996).

The Kansas Bill of Rights: 'Glittering Generalities' or Legal Authority, Kirk Redmond and David Miller, 69 J.K.B.A. No. 8, 18 (2000).

Attorney General's Opinions:

Liberty of press and speech; school newspapers. 89-38.

Freedom of religion, speech and press; use of senior citizens' center for church services. 93-127.

Community college board of trustees; prohibition on members (K.S.A. 71-1403). 95-69.

CASE ANNOTATIONS

1. Law applicable to civil and criminal cases distinguished and defined. Castle v. Houston, 19 Kan. 417, 422.

2. "Truth" full defense to civil action for slander or libel. Mundy v. Wight, 26 Kan. 173, 176.

3. All evidence admissible tending to prove truth of statements made. The State v. Mayberry, 33 Kan. 441, 444, 6 P. 553.

4. Defendant need prove only truth and publication for justifiable ends. The State v. Verry, 36 Kan. 416, 421, 13 P. 838.

5. Publication concerning attorney not privileged by connection with judicial proceedings. The State v. Wait, 44 Kan. 310, 313, 316, 24 P. 354.

6. Publication devoted largely to scandals and immorality may be prohibited. In re Banks, Petitioner, 56 Kan. 242, 243, 42 P. 693.

7. Privileged publication and "liberty of the press" discussed at length. Coleman v. MacLennan, 78 Kan. 711, 716, 725, 98 P. 281.

8. Employer not compelled to state cause for discharge of employee. Railway Co. v. Brown, 80 Kan. 312, 315, 102 P. 459.

9. Spoken words imputing unchastity actionable without proof of special damages. Cooper v. Seaverns, 81 Kan. 267, 284, 105 P. 509.

10. Defense in case involving charge of slackerism and perjury considered. Lewis v. Publishing Co., 111 Kan. 257, 259, 206 P. 873.

11. Statute penalizing advocacy of violence in bringing about governmental change is valid. State v. Fiske, 117 Kan. 69, 230 P. 88, 90. Reversed: Fiske v. Kansas, 274 U.S. 380, 47 S. Ct. 655, 71 L.Ed. 1108.

12. Section cited in determining whether or not publication actionable per se. Knapp v. Green, 123 Kan. 550, 256 P. 153. Questioned: Jerald v. Houston, 124 Kan. 657, 670, 261 P. 851.

13. Statute (K.S.A. 7-102) relating to admittance of attorneys to bar held valid. Depew v. Wichita Association of Credit Men, 142 Kan. 403, 406, 49 P.2d 1041.

14. Statute (K.S.A. 25-1714) prohibiting anonymous publication criticizing political candidates held valid. State v. Freeman, 143 Kan. 315, 319, 55 P.2d 362.

15. Cited; fraternal society member could not resort to courts when remedies within society not exhausted. Zeidler v. Knights of Columbus, 172 Kan. 557, 566, 241 P.2d 761.

16. Motion picture censorship act is definite and valid. Holmby Productions, Inc. v. Vaughn, 177 Kan. 728, 730, 282 P.2d 412. Reversed: 350 U.S. 870, 76 S. Ct. 117, 100 L.Ed. 770.

17. Destruction of obscene books seized without notice on an order by district court after hearing approved by Kansas Supreme Court. State v. A Quantity of Copies of Books, 191 Kan. 13, 16, 379 P.2d 254. Reversed: 378 U.S. 205, 84 S. Ct. 1723, 12 L.Ed.2d 809.

18. State's power to impose either civil or criminal penalty for defamation of a public official considered. Ganison v. Louisiana, 379 U.S. 71, 85 S. Ct. 214, 13 L.Ed.2d 125.

19. Obscene books; proceeding for confiscation; seizure. State, ex rel., v. A Quantity of Copies of Books, 197 Kan. 306, 308, 416 P.2d 703. Reversed without opinion: 388 U.S. 452, 87 S. Ct. 2104, 18 L.Ed.2d 1314.

20. Libel and slander action; standards stated for individual not public official; liability based on negligence. Gobin v. Globe Publishing Co., 216 Kan. 223, 226, 232, 531 P.2d 76.

21. No testimonial privilege for news reporter to withhold testimony in criminal proceeding. In re Pennington, 1 Kan. App. 2d 682, 573 P.2d 1099.

22. Imposing criminal sanctions for publishing truthful information obtained from public records unconstitutional. State v. Stauffer Communications, Inc., 225 Kan. 540, 542, 543, 545, 548, 592 P.2d 891.

23. Restrictions on access to expunged records under K.S.A. 21-4619 upheld; right of access to public records based on common law, not constitution; no violation of freedom of press or right to assert truth as a defense in libel or slander action. Stephens v. Van Arsdale, 227 Kan. 676, 693, 608 P.2d 972.

24. Guarantee of freedom of speech does not protect lawyer from disciplinary proceedings for knowingly using and publishing falsehoods in political campaign. State v. Russell, 227 Kan. 897, 899, 909, 610 P.2d 1122.

25. Injunction against teachers holding public meetings and speaking at school board meetings unconstitutional prior restraint. U.S.D. No. 503 v. McKinney, 236 Kan. 224, 236, 689 P.2d 860 (1984).

26. Both U.S. and Kansas Supreme Courts recognize that freedom of speech and press is not without certain limitations. In re Johnson, 240 Kan. 334, 336, 729 P.2d 1175 (1986).

27. Cited; public figure status of criminal defendant who is the subject of alleged defamatory magazine article examined. Ruebke v. Globe Communications Corp., 241 Kan. 595, 598, 738 P.2d 1246 (1987).

28. Right to comment upon matters of public interest does not give public official right to disparage private individual. Tomson v. Stephan, 699 F. Supp. 860, 863 (D. Kan. 1988).

29. Whether judge made requisite findings before issuing gag order; constitutional right to report information from public record and open court discussed. State v. Alston, 256 Kan. 571, 583, 887 P.2d 681 (1994).

30. School district violated public school student's free expression by removing controversial library book. Case v. Unified School Dist. No. 223, 908 F. Supp. 864, 877 (1995).

31. Legislator's attempt to influence another legislator's vote was inadmissible in blackmail action because not legitimate legislative activity. State v. Neufeld, 260 Kan. 930, 935, 926 P.2d 1325 (1996).

32. City ordinance provision requiring removal of political signs within seven days after election was unconstitutional. Outdoor Systems, Inc. v. City of Lenexa, Kan., 67 F. Supp. 2d 1231, 1237 (1999).

33. Municipal ordinance requiring permit to display sign without limiting discretion of officials granting permit held unconstitutional. Outdoor Systems, Inc. v. City of Merriam, Kan., 67 F. Supp. 2d 1258, 1262 (1999).

34. City policy banning racially insensitive markings on cars held unconstitutional violation of freedom of expression. Erickson v. City of Topeka, Kan., 209 F. Supp. 2d 1131, 1137 (2002).

35. Restrictions on number of newspapers and magazines inmate could receive held lawful. Rice v. State, 278 Kan. 309, 95 P.3d 994 (2004).

36. Allegation that supreme court rule violates constitution rejected. In re Comfort, 284 Kan. 183, 198, 159 P.3d 1011 (2007).