Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
13 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
The Rule
|
Prior restraints are presumptively unconstitutional. Remember:
licensing |
|
|
Schenck v. U.S. (1919)
|
The 1st Exception
Wartime The Clear and Present Danger Test — shouting “fire” in a crowded theater and causing a panic |
|
|
Near v. Minnesota (1931)
|
saturday press/ near publishes hateful stuff
minnesota forbits publish of such stuff near appeals the conviction saying its prior restraint near wins Minnesota can't stop publish but can punish |
|
|
Print — Near v. Minnesota
|
“Malicious, scandalous, and defamatory publications”
The problem of prior restraint vs. punishment |
|
|
Trinity Methodist Church v. FRC (1932)
|
Broadcasting
the problem of print vs. broadcasting shulter looses limited number of airwaves |
|
|
Freedman v. Maryland (1965)
|
film case
Film review/censorship boards Safeguards 5.4.3.2.1. The censor has the burden of proof. Decision must be made in a reasonable amount of time/quick review. 5.4.3.2.3. Right of due process/right to appeal must be assured. Result: The movie ratings system |
|
|
Near v. Minnesota (1931) in regards to censorship
|
Primary requirements of decency may be enforced against obscene
publications. The security of community life may be protected against incitements to acts of violence. The security of community life may be protected against the overthrow by force of orderly government. |
|
|
New York Times v. U.S. (1971)
|
The “Pentagon Papers” Case
Wartime vs. “police actions” Threats to the National Security The Justices Split . Black/Douglas — never Brennan/Marshall — in times of war Stewart/White Who has the power of prior restraint? 5.5.2.3.3.1.1. Stewart — the President White — Congress Will the national security be harmed in this instance? Stewart — no White — yes The dissenters — Burger/Harlan/Blackmun In times of war or damage to foreign policy Too little time to consider issues of the case fully |
|
|
Marchetti v. U.S. (1972)
|
classified material/secret
can be stopped, agents on field-dangerous, marchetti looses |
|
|
U.S. v. Progressive (1979)
|
The Atomic Energy Act of 1954
National Security cant distribute atomic bomb secrets stops magazine, case is moot bc another magazine published it |
|
|
Snepp v. U.S. (1980)
|
Constructive trust
Breach of contract/secrecy agreement wrote a book about U.S running out of Vietnam, signed contract therefore can be stopped |
|
|
U.S. v. CNN (1990)
|
National Security
Attorney-Client Privilege Fair Trial cnn wants to distribute prison tapes of governor from panama , ted turner distributes anyway get a fine |
|
|
Tory v. Cochran (2005)
|
prior restraint NOT a punishment in libel suits
5.6. The State vs. Private Action Distinction 5.6.1. State censorship is presumptively unconstitutional Private censorship is not presumptively unconstitutional => scheduling showings of films tory is not satisfied, distributes bad info about cochram who sues, wins but tory has no money so is asked to not picket anymore but its prior restraint so tory cant be stopped |
