Near v. Minnesota
283 U.S. 697 (1931)
📄 Read the Actual Opinion
U.S. Reports opinion (PDF) →📋 Summary of the Opinion
Jay Near published a scandal sheet accusing local officials of corruption. Minnesota tried to shut down his paper under a “public nuisance” law. The Supreme Court struck down the law, ruling that it imposed unconstitutional prior restraint on the press.
⚖️ Why It Mattered
This was the first major case protecting freedom of the press from state censorship. It established that government generally cannot stop publications before they’re printed.
✅ What It Provided or Took Away
✅ Provided:
Strong protection against government censorship before publication.
❌ Took Away:
States’ ability to use broad nuisance laws to suppress critical or unpopular press.
🤔 Overreach or Proper Role?
The Court was firmly within its role, enforcing the First Amendment against state action via incorporation.
💡 Plain-English Impact Today
Near laid the groundwork for modern press freedom. Governments can punish libel or unlawful speech after the fact, but they rarely can stop publication in advance.