Nor can I discern in those First Amendment considerations that led us to restrict the States» powers to regulate defamation of public officials any additional interest that is not served by the actual malice rule of New York Times, supra, but is substantially promoted by utilizing this Court as the ultimate arbiter of factual disputes in those
libel cases where no
unusual factors, such as allegations of harassment or the existence of a jury verdict resting on erroneous instructions, cf. New York Times, supra, are present.