One important Supreme Court ruling concerning Freedom of the Press is the case of Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier. This case concerns the student written and edited school newspaper of Hazelwood East High School. In May of 1983, Robert E. Reynolds, the high school principal, found two articles from the latest newspaper to be inappropriate. Reynolds ordered the two articles to be removed from the paper and the paper be withheld from publication. Cathy Kuhlmeier and two more former Hazelwood students brought the case to the Supreme Court. In a five to three decision, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the school district and held that the First Amendment did not require schools to affirmatively promote particular types of student speech. The court stated that schools are allowed to set high standards for student publications and are allowed to prohibit speech that goes against the shared values of the civilized order. I mostly agree with this decision. If the students published an inappropriate article, I think the school has the right to remove it. The school should have every bit of authority to decide upon the appropriateness of articles written by students that are to be published within the school. Schools do not do this to be tyrants, but instead do it for the best interest of the students. If a student wants to publish an inappropriate article, they can do so on their own time. By attending a public school, you agree to act based upon their rules. I think that if the school believes an article could potentially harm students or expose them to obscenity, they have every right to prevent the article from being published in school media outlets.
Along with that case, another supreme court ruling concerning Freedom of the Press is Schenck v. United States. In this case the Supreme Court ruled that distributing leaflets to draft-age men, urging resistance to induction, could be convicted of an attempt to obstruct the draft, a criminal offense. Therefore making Schencks criminal conviction constitutional.
Another Supreme court case that dealt with freedom of the press was Near v. Minnesota. This case held that the first amendment protects newspapers from prior restraint. This court decision extended protection of freedom of the press to the states through the 14th Amendment.
Going off of Danielle's comment regarding Near v. Minnesota, which protects newspapers from prior restraint, I would have to say I completely agree with this ruling. The Bill of Rights specifically guarantees the citizens of the US the right to freedom of press and prior restraint by the government limits this right. As soon as the government decides it's Constitutional to limit publication before it is shared with the American public, that's the start of a road toward a more socialist and unitarian form of government. Our government should not limit and restrict the citizens access to information about the government and other topics. Another court case that helped to show prior restraint was unconstitutional was Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart.
One important Supreme Court ruling concerning Freedom of the Press is the case of Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier. This case concerns the student written and edited school newspaper of Hazelwood East High School. In May of 1983, Robert E. Reynolds, the high school principal, found two articles from the latest newspaper to be inappropriate. Reynolds ordered the two articles to be removed from the paper and the paper be withheld from publication. Cathy Kuhlmeier and two more former Hazelwood students brought the case to the Supreme Court. In a five to three decision, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the school district and held that the First Amendment did not require schools to affirmatively promote particular types of student speech. The court stated that schools are allowed to set high standards for student publications and are allowed to prohibit speech that goes against the shared values of the civilized order. I mostly agree with this decision. If the students published an inappropriate article, I think the school has the right to remove it. The school should have every bit of authority to decide upon the appropriateness of articles written by students that are to be published within the school. Schools do not do this to be tyrants, but instead do it for the best interest of the students. If a student wants to publish an inappropriate article, they can do so on their own time. By attending a public school, you agree to act based upon their rules. I think that if the school believes an article could potentially harm students or expose them to obscenity, they have every right to prevent the article from being published in school media outlets.
ReplyDeleteAlong with that case, another supreme court ruling concerning Freedom of the Press is Schenck v. United States. In this case the Supreme Court ruled that distributing leaflets to draft-age men, urging resistance to induction, could be convicted of an attempt to obstruct the draft, a criminal offense. Therefore making Schencks criminal conviction constitutional.
DeleteAnother Supreme court case that dealt with freedom of the press was Near v. Minnesota. This case held that the first amendment protects newspapers from prior restraint. This court decision extended protection of freedom of the press to the states through the 14th Amendment.
DeleteGoing off of Danielle's comment regarding Near v. Minnesota, which protects newspapers from prior restraint, I would have to say I completely agree with this ruling. The Bill of Rights specifically guarantees the citizens of the US the right to freedom of press and prior restraint by the government limits this right. As soon as the government decides it's Constitutional to limit publication before it is shared with the American public, that's the start of a road toward a more socialist and unitarian form of government. Our government should not limit and restrict the citizens access to information about the government and other topics. Another court case that helped to show prior restraint was unconstitutional was Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart.
Delete