The Volokh Conspiracy - Burden of Proving Truth or Falsity in Defamation Cases in the U.S.:

Some comments in the Mental Tyranny of Legal Concepts made clear that this is not a broadly known rule, so I thought I'd just mention it here:

In a defamation case, at least when the speech is on a matter of public concern, "the plaintiff [must] bear the burden of showing falsity, as well as [the defendant's] fault, before recovering damages." This is true whether the plaintiff is a public figure or a private figure. See Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc. v. Hepps, 475 U.S. 767, 776 (1986). The common-law rule was that the defendant must prove truth, but Hepps changed that for First Amendment reasons.

Note: Before arguing whether this is the right result, please at least skim the Hepps reasoning.

	[Eugene Volokh, October 26, 2006 at 2:23pm] Trackbacks Burden of Proving Truth or Falsity in Defamation Cases in the U.S.: Some comments in the Mental Tyranny of Legal Concepts made clear that this is not a broadly known rule, so I thought I'd just mention it here: In a defamation case, at least when the speech is on a matter of public concern, "the plaintiff [must] bear the burden of showing falsity, as well as [the defendant's] fault, before recovering damages." This is true whether the plaintiff is a public figure or a private figure. See Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc. v. Hepps, 475 U.S. 767, 776 (1986). The common-law rule was that the defendant must prove truth, but Hepps changed that for First Amendment reasons. Note: Before arguing whether this is the right result, please at least skim the Hepps reasoning.