Prior Restraint Analysis

Question #1:

FACTS: Based on the Pentagon Papers, it could have an access to know about the history of U.S. involvement in Vietnam between the Year 1945 and the Year 1967. By using classified information leaked to the newspaper, The New York Times started to public a series of news stories about the reality and history of the Vietnam War. However, the Supreme Court said the injunction violated the Constitution.

RULES: Based on the Supreme Court, prior restraint is “the most serious and the least tolerable infringement on First Amendment rights.” Therefore, prior restraint occurs when there are following situations happen: first of all, any government body or representative; secondly, reviews speech or press prior to distribution; and thirdly,
In addition, the Court also repeatedly mentioned that prior restraints are generally unconstitutional. Besides, because of banning on reporting news through media, it can cause direct harm to the First Amendment rights of both the media and the public, so the First Amendment poses its greatest obstacle to direct prior restraints on the news
In addition, there are different perspectives on different understandings of the purposes and values of free expression about if the First Amendment prohibits government prior restraints on speakers or the press. Therefore, the Supreme Court has not set down this issue clear. However, today, the Constitution provides different degrees of protection to different speakers and to different types of speech.

Question #3:

For the No. 3 question, the answer will be “yes”. According the Supreme Court, when government prohibits publication or suppresses particular material, this is prior restraint, which is what we think of as good old garden-variety censorship. In addition, the following situations that are listed happen, the prior restraint occurs.
1. Any government body or representative;
2. Reviews speech or press prior to distribution;
3. Stops the dissemination of ideas before they reach the public;
Therefore, based on the fact, which is CIA agents and other federal employees work with the government, and the military officers are also belong to the government, so prior restraints are justified in these