The case for ignoring censorship orders

AP Photo/Jim Wells
Bars on publication, also known as prior restraints, are a serious violation of free speech.
The First Amendment forbids nearly all orders barring the press from publishing information, also known as prior restraints. But that doesn’t stop the government from trying.
For nearly 100 years, the Supreme Court has consistently rejected prior restraints on the press, including in its famous decision in the Pentagon Papers case. But lower courts and government officials continue to violate the Constitution by trying to gag the press from publishing, withholding vital information from the public. Prior restraints are antithetical to press freedom and must be stopped.
Dear Friend of Press Freedom,Here are this week’s top press freedom stories, plus updates on our work at Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF).A series to spotlight public-records-based local journalismA major reason why politicians are able to attack the press without much resistance is that the public …
Plus: When the First Amendment fails, try the Fifth
When authorities attacked their local newspapers for coverage with which they disagreed, the outlets themselves became the story
The death of the New York Times journalist and editor is a reminder that the fight against excessive government secrecy must live on.
Plus: Why Senate must not confirm Ed Martin
Plus: Trump hides migrant detention away at Gitmo
Lawyers and judge involved in illegal prior restraint should face consequences
Substack and Amazon Web Services’ First Amendment defense of journalist Jack Poulson should be a model for other platforms
A troubling federal court decision that upholds New Jersey’s Daniel’s Law lowers the First Amendment bar for privacy laws
We warned that the TikTok ban forgets the lessons of the Pentagon Papers case. Last week’s court decision upholding the law proved our point