Rating agencies like Moody's and Standard & Poor's have often argued that since they merely offer an opinion on creditworthiness, they cannot be sued because they have a right to free speech. But Fortune notes a recent case in which a judge seems to be taking a skeptical, fresh look at the argument.

Federal Judge Shira Scheindlin has allowed a lawsuit over a structured finance deal to go ahead in the face of this long-standing argument. So we'll hear lots more about this perhaps. There are some reasons why this isn't a First Amendment issue. "First, the agencies are paid by issuers, not investors--this gives the appearance of commercial speech...Second, the rating agencies participated in a 'dialogue,' as they put it, with banks when structured securities were created...it is arguably a form of participation rather than observation and comment. Third, while traditional ratings are usually made available to the general public, ratings on structured securities are often not so widely circulated." 

For more:
- here's the article

Related Articles:
The new face of credit ratings agencies
Ratings agencies' practices under more fire
Some radical ideas for credit ratings agency reform
New credit ratings schemes likely to emerge