Clarksdale Caves: City Drops Libel Suit Against Paper After Editorial Dust-Up

In a surprising turn of events, Clarksdale, Mississippi, has dropped its libel lawsuit against the local Clarksdale Press Register. This comes after the city accused the paper of libel following a critical editorial.

The lawsuit, initiated after a unanimous vote by Clarksdale’s four commissioners on Feb. 13, targeted a Feb. 8 editorial titled "Secrecy, Deception Erode Public Trust." The city officials claimed the editorial made false claims about how they informed the media regarding a meeting about a new tax.

According to the editorial, while the city claimed to have posted the meeting notice at city hall as required by law, the paper stated, "This newspaper was never notified. We know of no other media organization that was notified." The editorial further questioned, "Have commissioners or the mayor gotten kick-back from the community? Maybe they just want a few nights in Jackson to lobby for this idea - at public expense."

A judge initially granted the city's request for a temporary restraining order on Feb. 18, forcing the paper to remove the editorial from its website. But just a week later, the board of commissioners filed a request to dismiss the lawsuit. What a rollercoaster!

Clarksdale Mayor Chuck Espy alluded to a compromise, though the paper's owner denied any agreement was in place. "I am very thankful that this matter is now resolved due to the efforts of the owner of the Clarksdale Press Register and the city of Clarksdale," Espy stated before the vote. "I’m grateful for the compromise."

Espy had previously mentioned he would accept an offer from Wyatt Emmerich, president of Emmerich Newspapers, to clarify some claims in the editorial. This clarification would state that the clerk's failure to notify the newspaper was due to being "extremely busy, not any deliberate effort to hide the meeting," and that the phrase 'kick back from the community' meant 'push back from the community'.

However, Emmerich refuted the existence of any agreement, stating his offer was contingent on the city not filing a lawsuit and was rescinded when the paper's publisher wouldn't accept it without quitting. "The offer to publish a clarification was made by Emmerich Newspapers president on Feb. 14 on the condition that the city not file a lawsuit," Emmerich said. "The offer was rescinded the same day because Clarksdale Press Register publisher Floyd Ingram would not accept it without quitting. The city then filed the lawsuit on Feb. 14. A week later, Mayor Espy posted the clarification on his website saying we had reached an agreement. I gave no authorization for the mayor to publish the clarification nor say we reached an agreement. We have not published any clarification."

Emmerich suggested the city dropped the suit due to "the overwhelming national criticism it received" and that the paper would restore the original editorial after the judge rescinds the restraining order.

The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), which defended the Press Register, celebrated the decision. "If asking whether a politician might be corrupt was libel, virtually every American would be bankrupt," said FIRE attorney Josh Bleisch. "For good reason, courts have long held that political speech about government officials deserves the widest latitude and the strongest protection under the First Amendment. That’s true from the White House all the way down to your local councilman."