Jay Near published the Saturday Press. He claimed the Jews were in charge of organized crime in the city. He was declared a nuisance and an injunction was issued prohibiting future "scandalous matter"
> First time the Supreme Court declared a state's prepublication stature as unconstitutional -- NEWSPAPER DECLARED ACCEPTABLE; thus, declaring all prior restraints as unconstitutional -- 1st amendment will also protect the unjust
NY Times v. US (1971)
NY Times attempted to publish a series of stories based on a secret Pentagon study on the Vietnam War. aka the "Pentagon Papers" case.
> First time US filed an injunction against a newspaper
> 6-3 decision, US did not have enough proof to restrain the press
Grosjean v. American Press (1936)
Governor Huey Long convinced Louisiana legislature to pass a license tax of 2 percent on the gross receipts of the state's newspapers
> Supreme Court ruled a discriminatory state tax placed on newspapers of a certain circulation size was prior restraint
Minneapolis Star & Tribune v. Minn. Commissioner of Revenue (1983)
Minnesota decided to tax newspapers that used large amounts of ink and paper
> Supreme Court determined that the tax was discriminatory against large papers and a prior restraint
Arkansas Writer's Project, Inc. v. Ragland (1987)
Arkansas imposed a sales tax on general circulation magazines but NOT on religious, professional, trade, or sports journals.
> Supreme Court declared tax was unconstitutionally discriminatory
Cox Broadcasting v. Cohn (1971)
A tv station reported the name of a rape victim which was in violation of a Georgia statute. The father brought a civil suit against the situation.
> Supreme court ruled a state does NOT have the right to punish the media if the information was obtained in an open court room.
Landmark Communication, Inc. v. VA (1978)
Virginian Pilot published the name of a judge being investigated for misconduct by the Virginia Judicial Inquiry and Review Commission. This action violated a state law.
> Supreme Court declared that VA could not punish the media for publishing truthful information.
Smith v. Daily Mail Pub. Co. (1979)
Two newspapers identified a 14 year old who shot and killed a classmate at a junior high school. Reporters obtained the name by asking witnesses, police, and attorney. The action violated a WVA statute.
> Supreme Court ruled that the WVA statute was over-broad because it singled out only newspapers for punishment.
> a state can punish the media for truthful information "to further a state's need of the highest order"
US v. Progressive (1979) District Court case
A federal judge stopped the Progressive from publishing an article describing how to build an H-bomb. Even though the article was based on public information, it violated the Atomic Energy Act.
> Fed. gov't DROPPED ITS SUIT after information similar to the Progressive's article was published elsewhere.
> Gov't was successful in restraining the publication and ultimately altering the content of the article
Snepp v. US (1980)
Frank Snepp published a book, Decent Interval. He violated his CIA contract by publishing before submitting the manuscript to the CIA.
> Nondisclosure employment contracts are not a prior restraint and are not unconstitutional (CIA is correct)
> Snepp's earnings from the book, movies, speeches, etc. go to "constructive trust" which revert to the government.
Morison v. US (1988)
Samuel Morison, a civilian Navy analyst, was convicted in federal court of violating the Espionage Act of 1917. He passed a secret satellite photo of a soviet aircraft carrier to Jane's Defense Weekly.
> Government may punish an individual for leaking national security information to unauthorized persons in peace time.
Florida Star v. BJF (1989)
A reporter-trainee for the Florida Star acquired BJF's name (a rape victim) from a press release prepared by the sheriff's department. Her name was published in violation of a state statute.
> Supreme Court ruled a media defendant cannot be punished for lawfully gained information; HOWEVER, if the statute was drawn more narrow, the media could be punished for publishing truthful information.
Texas v. Johnson (1989)
Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag at the 1984 Republican National Convention to protest the politics of the Reagan administration.
> Burning of the US flag is protected by the Constitution as a symbolic form of speech.
R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul (1992)
Robert A. Victoria was charged for burning a cross inside a fenced yard of the home of Russ and Laura Jones, a black couple. The 17-year-old was charged under a city ordinance.
> Supreme Court declared a city ordinance which was based on "race, creed, religion, or gender" fighting words was unconstitutional content regulation.
Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeir (1988)
Principal censored an article about teen pregnancies and divorce from the student newspaper
> Public High School principals can censor High School newspapers (unlike college)
Miami Herald v. Tornillo (1974)
Miami Herald refused to publish a reply to the paper's criticism of Pat Tornillo, a candidate for the state legislature. The paper charged that Tornillo had led an illegal teachers' strike a few years earlier.
> Newspapers have stronger First Amendment rights than electronic media
Regina v. Hicklin (1868)
English litigation was the result of the distribution of an immoral publication. Pamphlet was anti-Catholic but prosecuted under the Obscene Publication Act of 1857.
> Allowed isolated passage effect, uses a susceptible person standard. Came to be known as the "Hicklin Test"
> Advocated the adoption of the 1873 Comstock Act, which kept racy books/material off of shelves
> appointed to enforce law; became the only censor of the time
US v. Ulysses (1934)
Custom officials tried to stop the importation of James Joyce's Ulysses.> Federal judge in NY ruled that the literary or artistic merit of a work can be weighed against any incidental obscenity. Overturned the Hicklin test. > Criminal debate over obscenity of content.
Roth v. US and Alberts v. CA (1957)
Roth was convicted for mailing an obscene book, circular, and advertising. Alberts was convicted for distribution of obscene books in CA.
> Obscenity must be determined by the average person--overturned the over-broad Comstock Act--the work must be judged as a whole and obscenity is utterly without redeeming social importance.
Ginzburg v. US (1966)
Ralph Ginzburg mailed a hardbound magazine along with two other periodicals. Advertising emphasized the erotic nature of his publications.
> Ginzburg was guilty of pandering - advertising and promoting non-obscene material in an obscene way.
Memoirs v. Mass. (1966)
John Cleland's Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure was ruled to be obscene
> obscene work must be utterly without a redeeming social value
Redrup v. NY (1967)
Redrup was prosecuted for distribution of "sexy" magazines
> statutes concerning obscene materials must be specific and narrow in scope
Ginsberg v. NY (1968)
Sam Ginsberg was convicted for selling porn to a minor.
> established a variable standard of obscenity - one for adults and one for juveniles
Stanley v. GA (1969)
Stanley was convicted for possession of obscene films found while police were searching his residence for illegal bookmaking
> private possession of obscene material is permissible (though they cannot make, buy, or sell)
Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act
> 1984 amended to be used against obscenity and porn
> can seize all "interests" connected to a racketeering enterprise
Miller v. CA (1973)
Miller was convicted under state law for conducting a mass-mailing campaign to advertise four books and a film containing sexually explicit pictures and drawings.
> Avg person, applying contemporary community standards
> Scientific, Literary, Artistic, Professional Standards (SLAPS) - all parts must be met for a work to be obscene
Hamling v. US (1974)
Hamling was convicted by the use of expert witnesses
> Jurors may rely on their own knowledge of their community's standards
Young v. American Mini Theaters (1976)
Detroit passed a zoning ordinance that prohibited adult bookstores/theaters from locating close to residential areas/churches/sexually oriented businesses
> ruled "erogenous zones" are a valid way to control obscenity
NY v. Ferber (1982)
Ferber was convicted for selling undercover police two films of young boys masturbating
> there is a need to physically and emotionally protect the well-being of minors
Osoborne v. Ohio (1990)
Ohio had a state law that made it a crime to view child pornography in own home. Osborne was arrested and convicted on a lower court and on appeal.
> state's interest far exceeded what it characterized as GA's "paternalistic interest" in protecting the minds of adult viewers of porn
Reno v. ACLU (1997)
ACLU challenged the Communication Decency Act (subsection of Telecom 96) as unconstitutional on its face
> S Ct. ruled CDA was unconstitutional
Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition (2002)
1996 - congress adopted an amendment to fed. child porn law that barred sale and distribution of any images that "appear" to depict minors performing sexual acts
> amendment ruled to violate 1st amendment
Child Pornography legislation
1977 - protection of children against sexual exploitation
1990 - child protection restoration and penalties enhancement act
1996 - child pornography prevention act
1996 - communication decency act (cda)
1977 - Protection of Children Against Sexual Exploitation
1990 - Child Protection Restoration and Penalties Enhancement Act
1996 - Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1995 (CPPA)
1997 - Communication Decency Act (CDA)
1998 - Child Online Protection Act (COPA)
Restrict access to minors
2001 - Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA) upheld in US v. ALA (2003)
If needed for RESEARCH, librarian can take block or filter off
PROTECT Act as amended to CPPA
Ashcroft v. ACLU (2004)
S Ct. upheld an injunction against COPA and determined that COPA was likely unconstitutional. Unconstitutional 1998.
Deleting Online Predators Act of 2006 (DOPA)
US v. Williams (2008)
Williams challenged his pandering conviction constitutionally