Emily's notes: No Law Flashcards
What is assassination and why is it important to censorship?
Assassination – a political murder, a form of expressive conduct
“Assassination is the most severe form of censorship.” – Oscar Wilde
What are fighting words?
…
What are true threats?
….
What is intimidating speech?
….
What is advocating the violent overthrow of the government?
…
What is obscenity?
….
What is time, place, and manner restrictions?
….
What is prior restraint?
The halting of expression at its source by the government
Prior restraint is….
“the most serious, least tolerable infringement” of First Amendment rights,
and comes into Court…
“bearing a heavy presumption against its constitutional validity.”
What is the background behind Near v. Minnesota (1931)?
Prior restraint is unconstitutional (5-4)
The Saturday Press (the Press) published attacks on local officials. The Press claimed that the chief of police had “illicit relations with gangsters.” Minnesota officials obtained an injunction in order to abate the publishing of the Press newspaper under a state law that allowed this course of action. The state law authorized abatement, as a public nuisance, of a “malicious, scandalous and defamatory newspaper, or other periodical. A state court order abated the Press and enjoined the Defendants, publishers of the Press (Defendants), from publishing or circulating such “defamatory and scandalous” periodicals.
What is the issue behind Near v. Minnesota?
Whether a statute authorizing such proceedings is consistent with the conception of the liberty of the press as historically conceived and guaranteed?
What was the outcome/ opinion of the court for Near v. Minnesota?
No. Judgment of the state court reversed. The fact that the liberty of press may be abused by miscreant purveyors of scandal does not effect the requirement that the press has immunity from previous restraints when it deals with official misconduct. Subsequent punishment for such abuses as may exist is the appropriate remedy, consistent with the constitutional privilege. Therefore, a statute authorizing such proceedings is not consistent with the conception of the liberty of the press as historically conceived and guaranteed and is thus, unconstitutional. The statute in question cannot be justified by reason of the fact that the publisher is permitted to show, before injunction issues, that the matter published is true and is published with good motives and for justifiable ends. This statute, if upheld, could lead to a complete system of censorship. Thus, the statute is a substantial infringement on the liberty of the press and in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution.
What is the background behind NY Times Co. v United States (1971)?
The United States sought to enjoin the New York Times and Washington Post from publishing contents of a confidential study about the Government’s decision making with regards to Vietnam policy. The District Court in the New York Times case and the District Court and the Court of Appeals in the Washington Post case held that the Government had not met the requisite burden justifying such a prior restraint.
What is the issue behind NY Times Co. v United States (1971)?
Whether the United States met the heavy burden of showing justification for the enforcement of such a restraint on the New York Times and Washington Post to enjoin them from publishing contents of a classified study?
What was the outcome of NY Times Co v. United States?
6-3 judgment meant very little but there was a per curiam after, the newspapers could continue printing because the government did not prove there was a justification for prior restraint