Is Durbin's speech ABSOLUTELY privileged or conditionally: Congressman Billybob?

[disraeligears]

Can Durbin be sued for his comments. Assume:

a) comments were slanderous per se

b) Durbin knew of their falsity and made them for simple political gain

c) the potential damage to the slandered party, the American soldier, is not just defamation, but increased likelihood of death on the battlefield.

Would a court view this not as protected political speech on the Senate floor, but, given the circumstances, reduce his privilege from one that is absolute to that of a conditional privilege.

Is his privilege absolute or conditional

[NutCrackerBoy]

R E P R E H E N S I B L E

[Congressman Billybob]

Whatever is spoken on the floor of the House or Senate is absolutely privileged under the Speech and Debate Clause. This has long since been tested and established in the US SCt. And in this instance, the Court ruling matches the language of the Constitution.

Hoever, if Durbin is dumb enough to repeat such comments outside the Senate, or if staff members repeat these comments on his/her own rather than as a staffer, then and only then privilege may not apply.

Congressman Billybob

Latest column: "Gitmo In, GitmoOut?"

[MikefromOhio]

bump to your comment

[river rat]

Too bad Dueling is illegal....

But then again, Bin Turban Durbin would be too cowardly to accept the challenge....

Semper Fi

[blau993]

Putting aside the issue of privilege, in order for Durbin's remarks to be actionable as slander, they would have to be directed toward an individual -- either someone mentioned by name or described in such a particular way that a reasonable person could identify the individual. Accusing "soldiers" of running a gulag probably wouldn't meet the standard.