Credit rating agencies have historically been quite successful in avoiding liability over their ratings by appealing to the First Amendment’s guarantee of the freedom of speech. In 2010, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act authorized unprecedented regulation of credit rating agencies’ methodologies and created a new standard governing agencies’ private liability. Courts should not mechanically apply the actual malice standard simply because the defendant is a credit rating agency; rather, when a credit rating agency plays an active role in structuring the deal, courts should recognize the credit rating agency’s speech for what it is professional speech and deny the credit rating agency the protection of the actual malice standard. As commercial speech, a credit rating agency may not be able to apply the actual malice standard, but it can use other kinds of protection under the First Amendment freedom. The U.S. experience is useful for China in future.