Clarksdale, Mississippi Ends Libel Lawsuit Against Local Newspaper Over Critical Editorial

In a significant turnaround, Clarksdale, Mississippi, has decided to withdraw its libel lawsuit against the Clarksdale Press Register. The city had previously filed this lawsuit after taking issue with an editorial that scrutinized its officials.

On February 13, the four commissioners of Clarksdale unanimously voted to pursue legal action against the local paper. Their complaint centered around a February 8 editorial titled “Secrecy, Deception Erode Public Trust.” The editorial accused the mayor and commissioners of failing to sufficiently inform the media about a critical meeting regarding a proposed tax increase.

The editorial pointedly noted, “The notice was posted at city hall as required by law and mentioned that the city would ‘give appropriate notice thereof to the media.’ However, this newspaper was never notified. We are not aware of any other media organization that received this notification.”

Furthermore, the piece questioned the integrity of the city officials, suggesting that they may be colluding with the community. It read, “Have commissioners or the mayor received kick-backs from the community? Until recently, we had not heard of any such reports. Perhaps they simply wish to spend some nights in Jackson to advocate for this idea—at public expense.”

On February 18, Judge Crystal Wise Martin of the Hinds County Chancery Court granted the city’s request for a temporary restraining order. This order mandated the removal of the editorial from the newspaper’s website and rendered it “inaccessible” to the public.

However, less than a week later, the board of commissioners took a new direction by filing a request to dismiss the lawsuit. This unexpected decision has sparked conversations about the motivations behind the city officials’ actions.

Mayor Chuck Espy hinted at a possible compromise regarding the editorial, though the newspaper’s owner has firmly denied any agreements were still in play. “I am very grateful that this matter is now resolved thanks to the efforts of the owner of the Clarksdale Press Register and the city of Clarksdale,” said Mayor Espy just before the commission’s vote. He expressed his appreciation for what he termed a compromise.

Earlier, Espy had conveyed to the Clarksdale Advocate that he was open to accepting an offer conveyed through a text message from Wyatt Emmerich, president of Emmerich Newspapers, the parent company of the Clarksdale Press Register. This offer included the possibility of clarifying some statements made in the contentious editorial.

Emmerich indicated that he could publish a clarification stating that the failure of the clerk to notify the newspaper seemed to be due to astonishing busyness rather than any intent to conceal the meeting. The message proposed that the phrase “kick back from the community” actually referred to “push back from the community,” clarifying that the intent did not imply any wrongdoing.

Nevertheless, Emmerich emphasized that no formal agreement existed. He reported to Fox News that his proposal had been made prior to the lawsuit and was no longer applicable. On February 14, he stated, “The offer to publish a clarification was made with the condition that the city would not file a lawsuit. That offer was rescinded the same day because the publisher of the Clarksdale Press Register would not accept it without resigning.”

After the city filed the lawsuit on February 14, Emmerich noted that a week later, Mayor Espy announced a clarification on his website, suggesting an agreement had been reached. However, Emmerich insisted he did not authorize the mayor’s statement and maintained that no clarification had been published.

In light of the public outcry surrounding the case, Emmerich commented on the city’s decision to drop the lawsuit, describing it as “probably a response to the overwhelming national criticism it received.” He anticipated that the newspaper would reinstate the original editorial once the judge rescinded the temporary restraining order, which the city has also requested.

The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, which had pledged to defend the Clarksdale Press Register, released a statement praising the city’s decision. “If questioning whether a politician may be corrupt qualifies as libel, then almost every American would face bankruptcy,” stated FIRE attorney Josh Bleisch. He further underlined that courts have consistently ruled that political speech concerning government officials warrants substantial protection under the First Amendment.

Political discourse should thrive within communities, fostering thoughtful discussion and accountability among elected officials. The events in Clarksdale serve as a reminder of the delicate balance between government transparency and the press’s right to freely express public opinions. A healthy democracy relies on informed citizens and independent media, both of which play crucial roles in maintaining oversight of government activities.