#2 PRIOR RESTRAINT
MATERIAL WILL BE ON THE TEST
PRIO RESTRAINT IS THE PRINCIPLE THAT I CAN'T PREVENT YOU FROM PUTTING SOMETHING OUT THERE BEFORE PUTTING IT OUT THERE
SOME EXCEPTIONS:
DEFEMATION
MILITARY ACTIONS
ETC
SPEECH OR NEWS CANNOT BE RESTRAINED.
GOVT CANNOT BLOCK ANY SPEECH OR PUBLICATION BEFORE IT ACTUALLY OCCURS
AFTER SOMETHING HAS BEEN PUBLISHED, THERE IS AN ANALYSIS OF WHETHER THE CONTENT BREAKS ANY LAWS
90% OF THE TIME WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUES RELATING TO MILITARY ig. giving comfort and aid to American enemies abroad
GOVT HAS TO PROVE THAT THOUGH
VERY IMPORTANT: FIRST EXAMPLE OF PRIOR RESTRAINT 1931 NEAR V MINNESOTA
JAY NEAR, PUBLISHER OF THE SATURDAY PRESS, CITY OFFICIALS STOOD BY AS GANGSTERS OPERATED ILLEGAL BUSINESSES THROUGHOUT THE CITY
NEAR COULD NOT CONVINCINGLY PROVE THE CHARGES WERE TRUE. FUTURE ARTICLES WERE SHUT DOWN AS A RESULT
APPEALED ALL THE WAY TO THE SCOTUS AND THEY RULED THAT MINNESOTA WAS UNCONSTITUTIONALLY ENGAGING IN PRIOR RESTRAINT
PRIOR RESTRAINT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL IN THIS CASE, EXCEPT IN EXTREME SITUATIONS, AND THE GOVERNMENT CARRIES THE BURDEN OF PROOF TO PROVE THE VALIDITY OF THE
Another important case is Austin v. Keefe in 1971, regarding prior restraint on information.
A community group posted pamphlets detailing the unfair practices of a local real estate agent, Keefe.
A lower court granted Keefe a plea for an injunction to halt distribution.
The US Supreme Court overruled the lower court's injunction, banning distribution, stating that rather than narrowly addressing the issue, it suppressed all distribution by the group.
The largest and most significant case is the Pentagon Papers (US v. New York Times).
The Supreme Court made it clear that even when national security is involved, the Court bears the burden of proof in prior restraint cases.
Daniel Ellsberg, who worked at the US Department of State and was an employee in Vietnam in the 1960s, expressed increasing doubts about the war.
HE leaked the TOP SECRET PENTAGON PAPERS TO NEIL SHEEHAN OF THE NEW YORK TIMES
US
NIXON WAS FURIOUS AT THE DECISION OF THE CASE
1979 PROGRESSIVE MAGAZINE
MAGAZINE OF THE DEM SOC LEFT OF THE US
THE MAGAZINE DECIDED TO PUBLISH INFORMATION ON HOW TO BUILD A NUCLEAR BOMB
IT SPURRED DEBATE REGARDING THE PROPER BALANCE BETWEEN NATIONAL SECURITY AND THE PUBLIC'S RIGHT TO KNOW
The immediate issue was the classification of information describing how to construct and detonate a hydrogen bomb.
US invoked the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 to prevent publication.
The editor claimed that the article would provide the public with the information essential to understanding current issues regarding nuclear weapons.
They believe that the publication would reveal vital national secrets and assist others in constructing a bomb.
Progressive asserted that all information had been taken from unclassified sources.
US DISTRICT COURT ISSUED A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
PHYSICISTS AT THE ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY WROTE TO SENATOR JOHN GLENN, IDENTIFYING PUBLISHED SOURCES OF INFORMATION
THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY CLASSIFIED THE LETTER, BUT SEVEN NEWSPAPERS SUBSEQUENTLY PUBLISHED IT
GOVT EVENTUALLY GAVE UP ITS EFFORTS TO RESTRAIN PUBLICATION, RULED THAT THE GOVT HAS NOT GIVEN THE BURDEN OF PROOF.