Conservapedia

Changes

Prior Restraint (view source)

Revision as of 19:55, September 26, 2022

1,389 bytes added ,  19:55, September 26, 2022
improved
Line 8: Line 8:  
*Board of Airport Comm'rs of Los Angeles v. Jews for Jesus, Inc., 482 U.S. 569, 575, 577, 96 L. Ed. 2d 500, 107 S. Ct. 2568 (1987) (regulation prohibiting "all 'First Amendment activities'" substantially overbroad).
 
*Board of Airport Comm'rs of Los Angeles v. Jews for Jesus, Inc., 482 U.S. 569, 575, 577, 96 L. Ed. 2d 500, 107 S. Ct. 2568 (1987) (regulation prohibiting "all 'First Amendment activities'" substantially overbroad).
   −
An exceptional case that allowed prior was ''USA v The Progressive''. It delayed publication of a magazine article on H-bomb secrets for six months in 1979.
+
An exceptional case that allowed a prior restraint was ''USA v The Progressive''. It delayed publication of a magazine article on H-bomb secrets for six months in 1979.
−
 
+
== Equity ==
 +
As the Supreme Court of [[Kentucky]] summarized, [[equity]] does not support a prior restraint:
 +
<blockquote>Aside from the First Amendment's heavy presumption against prior restraints, courts have long held that equity will not enjoin a libel. See Nebraska Press Ass'n, 427 U.S. at 589; Kramer v. Thompson, 947 F.2d 666, 677-78 (3rd Cir. 1991); Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Pierce, 814 F.2d 663, 672, 259 U.S. App. D.C. 134 (D.C. Cir. 1987) ("The usual rule is that equity does not enjoin a libel or slander and that the only remedy for defamation is an action for damages."); American Malting Co. v. Keitel, 209 F. 351, 354 (2d Cir. 1913) ("Equity will not restrain by injunction the threatened publication of a libel, as such, however great the injury to property may be. This is the universal rule in the United States . . . ."); Metropolitan Opera Assn, Inc. v. Local 100, Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees International Union, 239 F.3d 172, 177 (2d Cir. 2001); 42 Am. Jur. 2d, Injunctions, § 97 (2010) ("The general rule is that equity does not enjoin libel, rather, the only remedy for defamation is an action for damages, and there is a heavy presumption that prior restraints on expression are unconstitutional."). (footnotes omitted)</blockquote>
 +
''Hill v. Petrotech Res. Corp.'', 325 S.W.3d 302, 306 (Ky. 2010).
 +
[[category:Free Speech]]
 
[[Category:Law]]
 
[[Category:Law]]
 
[[Category:United States Supreme Court Cases]]
 
[[Category:United States Supreme Court Cases]]
Aschlafly
Anthony, Irenaeus, Siteadmin, apieditor, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
126,194

edits

Retrieved from "https://www.conservapedia.com/Special:MobileDiff/1889146"