I read in the Chicago Tribune today that Don Imus is suing CBS for 40M because of the first amendment. Freedom of Speech.
Is this an issue of the First Amendment?
I thought he was fired because the remarks he made were racist and discrimatory against women.
Unbelieveable. That someone who could be so wrong for what he said would think he can get 40M from anyone.
What do you think?
I guess it come down to what the original posting on Ad was this racial or now a first amendment issue?

This would seem to be more of a contractual issue than a free speech issue. (CBS is not the government, so I don't see how the First Amendment would apply.) The real legal question, it seems to me, is which of the two parties breached the contract. Imus, for violating CBS requirements? CBS, for dismissing him without paying off his contract? I don't have an opinion, and I think it would take an expert in contract law to offer one.

(Semi-obscure cultural reference: Is Professor Kingsfield available?)

For the record, I think that anybody has the right to offer offensive opinions, but that broadcasting companies are not required to provide that person with a medium.

Doing a search on Google News, the only article I found was on Voice of America:

http://www.voanews.com/english/Entertainme...05-03-voa40.cfm


It seems that he is suing over a violation of his contract with CBS rather than because his speech was protected by the first amendment. There aren't really any questions for debate, but it seems that if there were in fact clauses in his contract like those quoted here, then he certainly has a right to sue.

It looks to be more of a contractual issue.

Let the old boy knock himself out. I am sure that the corporation is chock full of attorneys to defend CBS in court.

Imus himself admitted many times on the air that he did a bad thing, that it was wrong for him to say what he did about the women's basketball team members. Unfortunately for him, it did not translate to him keeping his job. Yes, he lost a lot of money as a result, I am sure, but it was as a consequence of what he did.

But then, who but Imus, his manager, attorney, and CBS know what is included in the fine print of his contract?

I read in the Chicago Tribune today that Don Imus is suing CBS for 40M because of the first amendment. Freedom of Speech.
Is this an issue of the First Amendment?
I thought he was fired because the remarks he made were racist and discrimatory against women.
Unbelieveable. That someone who could be so wrong for what he said would think he can get 40M from anyone.
What do you think?
I guess it come down to what the original posting on Ad was this racial or now a first amendment issue?

The trouble with double-edged swords is that they cut both ways.

We have state laws that give employers the right to fire people for no reason whatsoever, unless the employment is done under a specific contract that forbids the firing under certain circumstances. Most people can't negotiate this sort of contract, but celebrities can. Celebrities hire agents to do the negotiation for them, part of the advantages of being The One. Apparently, regardless of the personal takes of others regarding the celebrity status of Don Imus, he was enough of The One to negotiate.

I can see this in another light. Since corporations have been given the status of citizens, it can be argued that this corporation has tried to curtail the Constitutional rights of another citizen. Here's where the two-edged sword might be able to cut both ways.

I, as a citizen of the United States, must not curtail the rights of another citizen of the United States. And the same goes for you. Despite the racist and sexist remark that Imus made, I think it's cool that he has the ability to fight back in ways that most of us don't have. Should this lawsuit reach the SCOTUS, perhaps the notion of corporations as citizens will be reexamined, along with the state laws that might give too much power to corporations on the firing side of things.

The same group of people who write Howard Stern's contracts write Imus'. That means CBS will be giving Imus 40M. the contracts are pretty black and white. CBS owes him money. That's how contracts work.

Well, actually, he had been warned- twice before. This was not his first infraction

the real problem is here- does anyone have a copy of his latest contract? No one can really know how this will play out without seeing the whole thing- most contracts, have some sort of "weasel clause" for the corporation for major stars that allow them to drop them for stuff like this- but, Imus has been in this biz a very long time, and probably has sharp contract lawyers of his own, and resources (still I am sure) to pony up the bucks to get lawyers on to CBS.

So it really comes down to two questions:

1) Is there a clause that forces CBS to pay no matter what?
2) Maybe CBS has a weasel clause- but the weasels representing Imus have told him they can break it?

I have only seen a couple "shock jock" contracts in my life- and the "firing" clause usually had some major severance package for firing, even "with cause"- equivilent to usually a year's salary.

Of course- that is very small potatoes compared to the national scene- but shock jocks KNOW that this can happen, and usually try to protect themselves in this case.

So, it really depends on how his contract is worded, in the end.