question: New York Times Co. v. Sullivan and Strauder v. West Virginia, cases with which organization?
answer: United States Supreme Court
context: Title: Heed Their Rising Voices
  Passage: Heed Their Rising Voices is a 1960 newspaper advertisement published in the "New York Times".  It was published on March 29, 1960 and paid for by the "Committee to Defend Martin Luther King and the Struggle for Freedom in the South".  The purpose of the advertisement was to draw attention and support towards Martin Luther King Jr. A recent felony charge of perjury was leveled against him and could have resulted in a lengthy imprisonment.  The headline of the advertisement was drawn from a phrase used in the "New York Times" editorial, "Amendment XV", published on March 19, 1960.  The advertisement became the source of a libel suit in the United States Supreme Court case "New York Times Co. v. Sullivan" (1964).
  Title: Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co.
  Passage: Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co., 497 U.S. 1 (1990), was a United States Supreme Court case that rejected the argument that a separate opinion privilege existed against libel.  It was seen by legal commentators as the end of an era that began with "New York Times Co. v. Sullivan" and continued with "Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.", in which the court clarified and greatly expanded the range and scope of what could be said in the press without fear of litigation.
  Title: New York Times Co. v. Sullivan
  Passage: New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case that established the actual malice standard, which has to be met before press reports about public officials can be considered to be defamation and libel; and hence allowed free reporting of the civil rights campaigns in the southern United States.  It is one of the key decisions supporting the freedom of the press.  The actual malice standard requires that the plaintiff in a defamation or libel case, if he is a public figure, prove that the publisher of the statement in question knew that the statement was false or acted in reckless disregard of its truth or falsity.  Because of the extremely high burden of proof on the plaintiff, and the difficulty of proving the defendant's knowledge and intentions, such claims by public figures rarely prevail.
  Title: Banamex v. Narco News
  Passage: Banamex v. Narco News, 2001 603429/00, was a New York Supreme Court case that extended the findings of New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, that freedom of the press applied to an online newspaper's reporting.
  Title: Harte-Hanks Communications, Inc. v. Connaughton
  Passage: Harte-Hanks Communications Inc. v. Connaughton, 491 U.S. 657(1989), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States supplied an additional journalistic behavior that constitutes actual malice as first discussed in "New York Times Co. v. Sullivan" (1964).  In the case, the Court held that departure from responsible reporting and unreasonable reporting conduct alone were not sufficient to award a public figure damages in a libel case.  However, the Court also ruled that if reporters wrote with reckless disregard for the truth, which included ignoring obvious sources for their report, plaintiffs could be awarded compensatory damages on the grounds of actual malice.
  Title: Strauder v. West Virginia
  Passage: Strauder v. West Virginia, 100 U.S. 303 (1880) , was a United States Supreme Court case about racial discrimination.  "Strauder" was the first time that the Court had reversed a state criminal conviction for a violation of a constitutional provision concerning criminal procedure.
citations: New York Times Co. v. Sullivan Strauder v. West Virginia