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.
Barring the platform would set a precedent for all sorts of future censorship, including bans on foreign news sites
It was bad enough when the city sought an unlawful prior restraint against Camacho. Now it’s going even further
Student journalists set an example for the professionals when it comes to standing up for the First Amendment
Here’s what journalists should watch for in the first case applying the state’s new law meant to protect against meritless anti-speech lawsuits
Mississippi shouldn’t copy other states by banning journalists from the Senate floor
The scope of self-censorship by the U.S. and international press in response to an Indian court order is a disturbing sign for the future
Policies prohibiting government employees from speaking to the press violate the First Amendment
When judges ignore the law to silence journalists, contempt of court is deserved
The Texas attorney general is “investigating” Media Matters for its reporting. Traditional journalists and news outlets could be next
New bill would undermine anonymous sourcing and invite libel tourism