英文字典中文字典


英文字典中文字典51ZiDian.com



中文字典辞典   英文字典 a   b   c   d   e   f   g   h   i   j   k   l   m   n   o   p   q   r   s   t   u   v   w   x   y   z       







请输入英文单字，中文词皆可：


请选择你想看的字典辞典：
单词字典翻译
rupestris查看　rupestris　在百度字典中的解释百度英翻中〔查看〕
rupestris查看　rupestris　在Google字典中的解释Google英翻中〔查看〕
rupestris查看　rupestris　在Yahoo字典中的解释Yahoo英翻中〔查看〕

安装中文字典英文字典查询工具!


中文字典英文字典工具:
选择颜色:
输入中英文单字

































































英文字典中文字典相关资料:


  • New York Times Company v. Sullivan | Oyez
    When the Times refused and claimed that they were puzzled by the request, Sullivan filed a libel action against the Times and a group of African American ministers mentioned in the ad A jury in state court awarded him $500,000 in damages The state supreme court affirmed and the Times appealed
  • New York Times Company v. United States | Oyez
    In what became known as the "Pentagon Papers Case," the Nixon Administration attempted to prevent the New York Times and Washington Post from publishing materials belonging to a classified Defense Department study regarding the history of United States activities in Vietnam
  • {{meta. fullTitle}} - Oyez
    In the intervening time, the Supreme Court decided New York Times v Sullivan , which stated that a public official may not recover damages for a defamatory falsehood relating to his or her official conduct unless there is evidence the statements were made with actual malice
  • {{meta. fullTitle}} - Oyez
    In New York Times Co v Sullivan (1964) the Court held that public officials in libel cases must show that a statement was made "with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not " These two cases concern libel as it pertains to public figures who are not public officials
  • {{meta. fullTitle}} - Oyez
    Did the Louisiana Supreme Court correctly apply the New York Times v Sullivan test, which required plaintiffs to prove that a defamatory statement against a public official was made with “malice?”
  • {{meta. fullTitle}} - Oyez
    Did the Louisiana Supreme Court correctly apply the New York Times v Sullivan test, which required plaintiffs to prove that a defamatory statement against a public official was made with “malice?”
  • {{meta. fullTitle}} - Oyez
    Citing prior holdings such as New York Times v Sullivan (1964), Justice Blackmun denied the Supreme Court of Virginia's ruling that commercial speech is not afforded First Amendment protection Furthermore, the advertisement in question contained important information in the "public interest" which went beyond merely informing readers of a
  • {{meta. fullTitle}} - Oyez
    New York Times Company v Sullivan A case in which the Court held that the First Amendment protects freedom of speech and freedom of the press, even about the conduct of politicians, unless the statements are made with actual malice
  • {{meta. fullTitle}} - Oyez
    In the time between the outcome of the trial and Rosenblatt’s appeal, the Supreme Court decided New York Times v Sullivan, where it held that a state cannot award damages to a public official for a defamatory falsehood unless the official proves that there was actual malice—knowledge that the statement was false or reckless disregard for
  • {{meta. fullTitle}} - Oyez
    Justices William J Brennan, Jr and William O Douglas dissenting, arguing that the failure to apply the New York Times v Sullivan standard to private persons involved in public matters would stifle "free and robust debate "





中文字典-英文字典  2005-2009