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.
Funding local news may be the best response if officials continue to yank contracts in response to critical news coverage
Republican politicians have flipped from rallying against censorship to threatening baseless prosecutions of journalists
From Cop City to the National Gallery of Art, officers continue to ignore the First Amendment and harass journalists covering civil unrest
Unconstitutional prior restraint adds to pattern of retaliation and censorship
Grand jury secrecy rules are not prior restraints on journalism
If the court did not intend to censor the media, it needs to promptly clarify to avoid chilling press freedom
An unconstitutional order once again extends a prior restraint on newspaper
Anti-press lawmakers are attacking the press by yanking contracts to publish public notices or ending requirements to publish notices in newspapers entirely
The raid in Kansas was uniquely egregious but it was far from the only newsworthy recent attack on the press
Authorities finally did the right thing, but the Record never should have been raided in the first place