Freedom Of The Press: The First Amendment Explored

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is a critical component of American democracy, safeguarding the fundamental freedoms of speech and the press. It acts as a bulwark against government overreach, empowering citizens with the right to express themselves freely and hold their leaders accountable. This amendment, adopted in 1791, ensures that Congress cannot make laws that infringe upon religious practices, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, the right to assemble, and the right to petition the government. The First Amendment has been the subject of extensive debate and litigation, with the Supreme Court playing a pivotal role in interpreting and upholding these freedoms. The amendment's protection of the press, in particular, has been essential in fostering a vibrant marketplace of ideas and enabling journalists to act as watchdogs against governmental misconduct.

Explore related products

Murder the Truth: Fear, the First Amendment, and a Secret Campaign to Protect the Powerful

$18.88 $32.99

Freedom for the Thought That We Hate: A Biography of the First Amendment

$10.99 $17.99

A Short & Happy Guide to the First Amendment (Short & Happy Guides)

$28 $28

Understanding the First Amendment (Understanding Series)

$51.73 $55

The First Amendment: Essays on the Imperative of Intellectual Freedom

$23 $7.95

Make No Law: The Sullivan Case and the First Amendment

$14.29 $20

The First Amendment

The text of the First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press". This amendment protects the freedom of the press by prohibiting the government from passing laws that restrict the media's ability to publish information and opinions. This protection applies to a diverse range of media formats.

The Supreme Court has ruled that the First Amendment protects against pre-publication censorship in almost all cases. While the amendment does not grant the media special access to information, it does protect the right to publish information and opinions without governmental interference.

Free Speech Clause

The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects freedom of speech and freedom of the press. The Free Speech Clause, which falls under the First Amendment, states that "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech". This clause went through several iterations before it was adopted as part of the First Amendment.

James Madison, who would later become the fourth president of the United States, drafted an initial version of the speech and press clauses that was introduced in the House of Representatives on June 8, 1789. Madison's draft stated: "The people shall not be deprived or abridged of their right to speak, to write, or to publish their sentiments; and the freedom of the press, as one of the great bulwarks of liberty, shall be inviolable".

The House of Representatives special committee rewrote Madison's language to make the speech and press clauses read: "The freedom of speech and of the press, and the right of the people peaceably to assemble and consult for their common good, and to apply to the government for redress of grievances, shall not be infringed".

The Senate subsequently rewrote the speech and press clauses to read: "That Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and consult for their common good, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances".

The Free Speech Clause protects both direct (words) and symbolic (actions) speech. For example, in West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette, the Supreme Court held that students have the right not to salute the flag. Similarly, in Tinker v. Des Moines, the Court ruled that students do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate, upholding their right to wear black armbands to school to protest a war.

While the Free Speech Clause protects freedom of speech, it does not grant absolute freedom. The U.S. Supreme Court has struggled to determine what exactly constitutes protected speech. For instance, in Cohen v. California, the Court considered whether the use of certain offensive words and phrases to convey political messages is protected speech.

Free Press Clause

The First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States governs freedom of the press. The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press". This is known as the Free Press Clause.

The Free Press Clause acknowledges the critical role played by the press in American society. Justice Potter Stewart argued that the Constitution requires sensitivity to the role of the press, and to the special needs of the press in performing its function effectively. This is supported by several Supreme Court decisions, including Miami Herald Pub. Co. v. Tornillo (1974) and Landmark Communications v. Virginia (1978).

However, the Free Press Clause does not grant the press unlimited freedom from government restraint. In a 1978 ruling, the Court considered whether the institutional press is entitled to greater freedom from governmental regulations than non-press entities. Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote that the Court had not yet resolved whether the Press Clause confers upon the institutional press any freedom from government restraint not enjoyed by all others.

Several Supreme Court holdings suggest that the Free Press Clause does not give the press the power to compel the government to provide information that is not available to the general public. For example, in Saxbe v. Wash. Post (1974) and Pell v. Procunier (1974), the Court ruled that the press does not have a right to access prisons beyond what is available to the general public.

The Free Press Clause is closely related to the Free Speech Clause, and there is some debate over whether these clauses provide coextensive protections for the media. Some Supreme Court decisions have analysed the relevant constitutional protections without significantly differentiating between the two clauses.

Explore related products

First Amendment (Examples & Explanations)

$50.09 $76.95

The First Amendment (Concepts and Insights)

$45

The Case Against Free Speech: The First Amendment, Fascism, and the Future of Dissent

$28 $14.95

First Amendment For Beginners

$11.78 $15.95

Free Speech, Social Media Censorship, & the First Amendment: Classical Learner's Cubs to Bears

$14.99

First Amendment: [Connected eBook] (Aspen Casebook Series)

$240.9 $308

The institutional press

The First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States governs freedom of the press. It states that "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press".

The late 20th century saw an increasing concentration of news outlet ownership, leading to a heavier reliance on advertising revenue that biased content. The institutional press is now also facing competition from digital platforms and social media, which has resulted in a long-term decline in journalistic authority. This has been described as a "crisis of the institutional press".

Despite these challenges, societies still need a well-functioning institutional press to tackle societal, economic, and environmental issues. The institutional press can influence societal outcomes, from government agendas to public opinion and voting behaviour. It can also prompt changes in corporate governance, shape the valuation of firms at IPO, influence firm founding, confer legitimacy on industries, and elevate de novo technological innovations in public consciousness.

Supreme Court rulings

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides that the government must not "abridge the freedom of speech, or of the press". The Supreme Court has made several rulings on the freedom of the press, also analysing the relevant constitutional protections without significantly differentiating between the Free Speech Clause and the Free Press Clause.

In Associated Press v. NLRB (1937), the Supreme Court ruled that applying an antitrust law to the Associated Press did not violate either the freedom of speech or of the press. In 1941, Bridges v. California used the First Amendment to overturn contempt convictions against a newspaper and an individual who had criticised judicial proceedings. In 1942, Barber v. Time ruled that press freedom and individual privacy are not absolute rights and must be balanced. Courts must consider the "proper public interest".

In 1944, Hartzel v. United States overturned a conviction under the Espionage Act of 1917, shifting towards tolerance of First Amendment speech criticising the war. In 1946, Mabee v. White Plains Publishing Co. and Oklahoma Press Publishing Co. v. Walling found that a wage-hour administrator could issue a subpoena to a newspaper without violating the First Amendment. In 1951, Dennis v. U.S. considered the tension between freedom of speech and the need to curb false or malicious defamation of racial and religious groups.

In 1952, Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson found that expression by means of motion pictures is included within the free speech and free press guarantee of the First Amendment. In 1964, New York Times Co. v. Sullivan defended the First Amendment right of free press against prior restraint by the government. In 1969, Brandenburg v. Ohio and Red Lion Broadcasting Co., Inc. v. FCC upheld the freedom of speech and press, except when such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action.

In 1974, Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Tornillo found that the First Amendment freedoms of speech and press would be severely diminished if the government could conceal vital information about its functioning. In 1976, Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart ruled that a gag order prior to jury impanelment violated the First Amendment right of freedom of the press. In 1978, Landmark Communications, Inc. v. Virginia found that punishing the press for divulging information from a judicial commission violated the First Amendment freedom of the press. In 1985, Lowe v. Securities and Exchange Commission ruled that under the First Amendment, the Securities and Exchange Commission could not prevent a financial manager from publishing an investment newsletter.

Frequently asked questions