Cohen v. Cowles Media Co.

Cohen v. Cowles Media Co.
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued March 27, 1991 Decided June 24, 1991
Full case name	Dan Cohen v. Cowles Media Company, dba Minneapolis Star & Tribune Company, et al.
Citations	501 U.S. 663 (more) 111 S. Ct. 2513; 115 L. Ed. 2d 586; 1991 U.S. LEXIS 3639; 59 U.S.L.W. 4773; 18 Media L. Rep. 2273; 91 Cal. Daily Op. Service 4796; 91 Daily Journal DAR 7417
Prior history	Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Minnesota
Court membership
Case opinions
Majority	White, joined by Rehnquist, Stevens, Scalia, Kennedy
Dissent	Blackmun, joined by Marshall, Souter
Dissent	Souter, joined by Marshall, Blackmun, O'Connor
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. I

Cohen v. Cowles Media Co., 501 U.S. 663 (1991), was a U.S. Supreme Court case holding that the First Amendment freedom of the press does not exempt journalists from generally applicable laws.

Dan Cohen, a Republican associated with Wheelock Whitney's 1982 Minnesota gubernatorial run, provided inculpatory information on the Democratic challenger for Lieutenant Governor, Marlene Johnson, to the Minneapolis Star Tribune and St. Paul Pioneer Press in exchange for a promise that his identity as the source would not be published. Over the reporters' objections, editors of both newspapers independently decided to publish his name. Cohen consequently lost his job at an advertising agency. He sued Cowles Media Company, who owned the Minneapolis Star Tribune.

In 1988, a jury of six found in Cohen's favor. The Minnesota Supreme Court reversed. The United States Supreme Court, while refusing to reinstate the damages, remanded the case to the Minnesota Supreme Court, which reinstated the jury's original verdict of $200,000.

The Cowles Media Company was found liable based on a theory of promissory estoppel.

The Supreme Court found, in a majority decision, that:

Justice Blackmun's dissent focussed on the concept that applying promissory estoppel punished the publication of truth.