Parties: Zurcher v. Stanford Daily
Date: 1978-05-31
Identifiers:
Opinions:
Segment Sets:
Paragraph: 44 - It seems to me self-evident that police searches of newspaper offices burden the freedom of the press. The most immediate and obvious First Amendment injury caused by such a visitation by the police is physical disruption of the operation of the newspaper.
Notes:
Preferred Terms:
Phrase match: the freedom of the press. The
Search time: 2017-10-13 13:47:37 Searcher: ars9ef Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk
Paragraph: 45 - Protection of those sources is necessary to ensure that the press can fulfill its constitutionally designated function of informing the public, because important information can often be obtained only by an assurance that the source will not be revealed. Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665, 725-736, 92 S.Ct. 2646, 2671-2677, 33 L.Ed.2d 626 (dissenting opinion). And the Court has recognized that " 'without some protection for seeking out the news, freedom of the press could be eviscerated.' "
Notes:
Preferred Terms:
Phrase match: news, freedom of the press could
Search time: 2017-10-13 13:47:37 Searcher: ars9ef Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk
Paragraph: 56 - Perhaps as a matter of abstract policy a newspaper office should receive no more protection from unannounced police searches than, say, the office of a doctor or the office of a bank. But we are here to uphold a Constitution. And our Constitution does not explicitly protect the practice of medicine or the business of banking from all abridgment by government. It does explicitly protect the freedom of the press.
Notes:
Preferred Terms:
Phrase match: the freedom of the press
Search time: 2017-10-13 13:47:37 Searcher: ars9ef Editor: ars9ef tcs9pk Segmenter: ars9ef tcs9pk