View Single Post
Old April 16, 2013, 03:57 PM   #207
zukiphile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,436
Quote:
Originally Posted by JD
You are comparing a blatant 1A suppression to the process to redress and contest a clerical error- in the "case" we're discussing the faulty FTA for an ex-wife who did not receive her summons in the mail to demonstrate that fixing it after the fact is not a perfect solution to preventing it beforehand.
I am comparing a prior restraint on your right of free speech to a prior restraint on your ability to purchase a firearm.

I agree that in both instances the remedy of later litigation is not a perfect way to maintain the constitutional protection of the right.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JD
And one cannot go to a judge, and get.. here I may get it backwards between TRO's and Injunctive Relief but I believe it's- Injunctive Relief prohibiting the State from suppressing the letter with the likely outcome that they'll be found violating my constitutional right to publish?
I think you have the right idea in that injunctive relief would be the consequence of a successful process that begins with a temporary restraining order.

However, we do not generally viewed that as an excuse for the federal government to engage in prior restraint of speech (the Pentagon papers case was a rare exception and one that occurred with the cooperation of the publisher involved). Instead, we prohibit the federal government from violating the First Amendment in the first place.
zukiphile is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.03316 seconds with 8 queries