Near v. Minnesota (1931)

Facts of the Case

Jay Near, a publisher in Minneapolis, printed articles in The Saturday Press accusing local officials of being involved with gangsters. His paper often attacked public officials with claims of corruption, many of which were anti-Semitic and offensive. Minnesota officials used a state “gag law” that allowed courts to stop the publication of any newspaper deemed “malicious, scandalous, or defamatory.” A county court declared The Saturday Press a public nuisance and barred Near from publishing further editions. Near challenged the law, arguing it violated freedom of the press under the First Amendment.

Constitutional Question

Does a state law that allows prior restraint (government censorship of publications before they are printed) violate the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of the press?

Arguments

  • Near’s Arguments:
    • The Minnesota law imposed unconstitutional prior restraint, which the First Amendment prohibits.
    • Freedom of the press protects not only popular or agreeable speech but also controversial and offensive speech.
    • Once censorship is allowed, it sets a dangerous precedent for silencing criticism of government officials.
  • State of Minnesota’s Arguments:
    • The law targeted malicious and defamatory publications, not legitimate journalism.
    • The state had a right to protect public order and reputations from harmful publications.
    • Prior restraint was necessary in cases of scandalous or false publications to prevent ongoing harm.

Decision

The Supreme Court, in a 5–4 decision, struck down the Minnesota law.

  • Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes, writing for the majority, held that the statute was an unconstitutional form of prior restraint.
  • The Court ruled that while some exceptions exist (such as preventing publication of military secrets or incitement to violence), censorship before publication is almost always unconstitutional.
  • Offensive or defamatory publications could be punished after the fact through libel laws, but the government could not ban them in advance.

Significance

  • Established the rule against prior restraint: This case is a cornerstone of American press freedom, making it extremely difficult for the government to censor publications before they appear.
  • Applied First Amendment protections to the states: Through the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause, the Court made clear that state governments are also restricted from imposing prior restraint.
  • Foundation for later press freedom cases: Near set the stage for New York Times v. United States (1971) (the “Pentagon Papers” case), where the Court reinforced that prior restraint is presumptively unconstitutional.

Near v. Minnesota is widely considered the case that gave real strength to the principle of a free and independent press in the United States.