Question

freedom of press and religion quick check
how has one specific supreme court ruling expanded freedom of speech by limiting a public officials ability to press for libel? (1 point)
new york times v. united states determined that libel is allowed in certain instances.
new york times v. sullivan determined that actual malice must be proven to pursue charges of libel in the case of a public official.
near v. minnesota determined that libel is allowed if it serves the interest of the public.
adams v. jefferson determined that pursuing charges of libel is unconstitutional.

Explanation:

In the New York Times v. Sullivan case, the Supreme - Court ruled that for a public official to win a libel suit, actual malice (knowing falsehood or reckless disregard for the truth) must be proven. This raised the bar for public officials to press for libel, thus expanding freedom of speech. The other cases do not address this specific limitation on public officials' ability to press for libel in the same way.

Answer:

New York Times v. Sullivan determined that actual malice must be proven to pursue charges of libel in the case of a public official.