This is the old version of the H2O platform and is now read-only. This means you can view content but cannot create content. You can access the new platform at https://opencasebook.org. Thank you.
8 Playlists, 7 Links, 7 Media, 3 Texts Total
04/25/2016 by Lindsay Maizland
04/25/2016 added by Lindsay Maizland
(more)Near v. Minnesota by Jacob Atkins (less)
04/25/2016 added by Lindsay Maizland
(more)Near v. Minnesota Analysis by Jacob Atkins (less)
04/25/2016 by Lindsay Maizland
Lindsay Maizland | 0 Words | April 25, 2016
Lindsay Maizland | 0 Words | April 25, 2016
04/25/2016 added by Lindsay Maizland
(more)In 1931 the Supreme Court rejected Minnesota’s attempt in establishing prior restraint over a contentious newspaper that denounced Minneapolis officials and police force of corrupt behavior. Under Minnesota’s Public Nuisance Law of 1925, former Governor Floyd Olson attempted to prosecute and imprison J.M. Near over the “defamatory” material to no prevail. Considering that this landmark case permitted the continual distribution of critical content regarding state executives, the Near v. Minnesota decision created newfound territory in protecting First Amendment rights and Freedom of the Press from political intervention. Ultimately new precedents were formed surrounding what governments can legally censure. (less)
04/25/2016 by Lindsay Maizland
04/25/2016 by Lindsay Maizland
Lindsay Maizland | 0 Words | April 25, 2016
This is the old version of the H2O platform and is now read-only. This means you can view content but cannot create content. If you would like access to the new version of the H2O platform and have not already been contacted by a member of our team, please contact us at h2o@cyber.law.harvard.edu. Thank you.