Question

guided reading activity 13-4
freedom of the press
★directions use the information in your textbook to complete this chart. give the supreme court’s current opinion on each item involving freedom of the press and cite the specific court cases involved.
the supreme court and freedom of the press

	court’s opinion	case(s)
fair trials and free press		sheppard v. maxwell
gag orders
protecting news sources
radio and television
motion pictures
e-mail and the internet
obscenity
advertising

Answer:

To complete this guided reading activity on "Freedom of the Press" and the Supreme Court's opinions/cases, we analyze each row:

1. Fair Trials and Free Press

• Court’s Opinion: The Supreme Court has held that while the press has a right to report on trials, steps (like gag orders, sequestering jurors, or changing venues) may be taken to ensure a fair trial if pretrial publicity could prejudice the jury. The Court balances the First Amendment (press freedom) with the Sixth Amendment (right to a fair trial).
• Case(s): Sheppard v. Maxwell (1966) is already cited. This case involved extensive pretrial publicity in a murder trial; the Court ruled the defendant’s right to a fair trial was violated, leading to guidelines on limiting press interference with trials.

2. Gag Orders

• Court’s Opinion: Gag orders (restraining the press from reporting on a case) are generally disfavored. The Court requires strict scrutiny: a gag order is only constitutional if it’s the least restrictive means to ensure a fair trial, and the government must show a “compelling interest” (e.g., extreme pretrial publicity that threatens jury impartiality).
• Case(s): Nebraska Press Assn. v. Stuart (1976) – The Court struck down a gag order, holding that prior restraint on the press is presumptively unconstitutional, even to ensure a fair trial.

3. Protecting News Sources

• Court’s Opinion: There is no absolute constitutional “reporter’s privilege” to refuse to testify about confidential sources. However, some states have “shield laws” (statutory privileges), and courts may balance the press’s interest in confidentiality against the need for evidence in criminal cases.
• Case(s): Branzburg v. Hayes (1972) – The Court ruled reporters do not have a First Amendment right to refuse to testify before grand juries about criminal activity they witnessed or investigated.

4. Radio and Television

• Court’s Opinion: Broadcast media (radio/TV) receive less First Amendment protection than print media (historic rationale: limited broadcast spectrum, “public interest” in regulating content). The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) can regulate content (e.g., indecency, equal time rules), but regulations must be narrow and serve a compelling interest.
• Case(s): Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC (1969) – Upheld the “fairness doctrine” (requiring broadcasters to present balanced views on controversial issues), citing the limited spectrum and public interest in diverse viewpoints.

5. Motion Pictures

• Court’s Opinion: Motion pictures are protected by the First Amendment (not “obscene” or “libelous”). The Court struck down censorship systems that treated movies as “business” rather than “speech.”
• Case(s): Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson (1952) – Overturned New York’s film censorship law, ruling movies are “speech” protected by the First Amendment (previously, movies were regulated as commerce).

6. E - Mail and the Internet

• Court’s Opinion: The Internet receives the highest First Amendment protection (like print media), as it is an open, decentralized medium. Laws restricting online speech (e.g., indecency, content - based regulations) are subject to strict scrutiny.
• Case(s): Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union (1997) – Struck down parts of the Communications Decency Act, holding that restricting “indecent” online speech violated the First Amendment (Internet is a “democratic” medium deserving strong protection).

7. Obscenity

• Court’s Opinion: Obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment. The Court uses the Miller test: (1) average person finds it appeals to prurient interest; (2) depicts sexual conduct in a patently offensive way (by community standards); (3) lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
• Case(s): Miller v. California (1973) – Established the Miller test for obscenity, allowing states to regulate obscene materials (but not “pornography” that fails the test).

8. Advertising

• Court’s Opinion: Commercial speech (advertising) is protected by the First Amendment but receives intermediate scrutiny. Laws regulating commercial speech are constitutional if they (1) target a substantial government interest, (2) directly advance that interest, and (3) are not more extensive than necessary.
• Case(s): Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council (1976) – Ruled that advertising (e.g., prescription drug prices) is commercial speech and protected by the First Amendment (overturning a ban on price advertising).

To fill the chart, use these summaries for “Court’s Opinion” and the cited cases for each row. For example:

Topic	Court’s Opinion	Case(s)
Gag Orders	Presumptively unconstitutional; strict scrutiny for necessity	Nebraska Press Assn. v. Stuart
Protecting News Sources	No absolute privilege; balance press/evidence needs	Branzburg v. Hayes
Radio and Television	Less protection (spectrum scarcity); FCC can regulate in public interest	Red Lion Broadcasting v. FCC
Motion Pictures	Protected speech (not “obscene”); no censorship as “business”	Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson
E - Mail/Internet	Highest 1st Amend. protection; strict scrutiny for restrictions	Reno v. ACLU
Obscenity	Not protected; use Miller test to define	Miller v. California
Advertising	Commercial speech (intermediate scrutiny); regulate only for substantial interests	Virginia State Bd. of Pharmacy v. VCCCS

This aligns with constitutional law principles and landmark Supreme Court cases on press freedom.