Near vs. Minnesota

From MN150

Revision as of 16:53, 27 November 2007 by Mejaco (Talk | contribs)
(diff) ←Older revision | Current revision (diff) | Newer revision→ (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search
Winning Nomination

I think that court decisions often have an important effect on our society. Among the most important and most frequently cited cases was Near vs. Minnesota of 1931. The state legislature had passed a law allowing the shutdown of a blatantly defamatory newspaper called the Saturday Press. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled this law to be unconstitutional and stated that even when the right was misused, the press had immunity from any prior restraint.

This was truly a landmark decision that affirmed one of the basic freedoms in this country.
~Steve Trimble, St. Paul, MN



Runner-up Nominations

The 1931 United States Supreme Court ruling by this title was the first court test of the principle of a free and unfettered press being essential to the defense of democracy against the forces of corruption and the status quo.
~Larry Ellis Reed, Winona, MN


Contents

History

1931

A landmark case upholding freedom of speech

In 1925, the Minnesota legislature passed the Public Nuisance Law, or "Minnesota Gag Law." Its purpose was to silence a rash of scandal sheets, including Duluth's Rip-Saw, the Twin Cities Reporter, published in both Minneapolis and St. Paul, and, especially, the Saturday Press, published in Minneapolis by Howard A. Guilford and Jay M. Near. With their frequent charges of government corruption and their anti-Semitic viewpoints, the publications' editors were characterized as courageous journalists or as notorious bottom-feeders, depending on one's point of view.

Two years later, Hennepin county attorney Floyd B. Olson filed a complaint against Near and Guilford's Saturday Press, asking for a restraining order under the Gag Law. It was granted, and the Minnesota Supreme Court later upheld the decision, ruling that the paper was a scandalous publication and that it constituted a nuisance and endangered safety.

The story might have ended there but for Near's next step, which eventually led him to the U.S. Supreme Court. He wrote to a newly founded New York organization, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Roger Baldwin, the ACLU's founder, gave Near $150 and a pledge to appeal his gag order. "We see in this new device for previous restraint a menace to the whole principle of freedom of the press," the ACLU said.

Near then garnered the support of Robert McCormick, publisher of the Chicago Tribune. The Tribune's lawyer, Weymouth Kirkland, prepared an appeal and argued the first freedom of the press case of prior restraint before the U.S. Supreme Court. On July 31, 1931, the Supreme Court ruled that the Gag Law was unconstitutional.

As Fred W. Friendly wrote in his Minnesota History article (Winter 1978), "Censorship and Journalists' Privilege": "A paragraph of [Chief Justice] Hughes's majority opinion in the Near case is perhaps more relevant now than on that hot June day in 1931 when he read it aloud in the old Supreme Court chamber in the United States Capitol":
"The administration of government has become more complex, the opportunities for malfeasance and corruption have multiplied, crime has grown to most serious proportions, and the danger of its protection by criminal alliances and official neglect, emphasize the primary need of a vigilant and courageous press, especially in the great cities. The fact that the liberty of the press may be abused by miscreant purveyors of scandal does not make less necessary the immunity of the press from previous restraint in dealing with official misconduct.'"

Resource Links

Share your memories on this topic

Notes


    Media



    Views
    Personal tools