Skip to main content

Prior Restraint

Prior restraint is basically the government attempting to stop information they deem not good from getting to the public. They can use this against anyone, reporters, superstars, my mom, and even bloggers, though my moms not going down without a fight (; . In 2013 the government issued a prior restraint on a blogger from alabama named Roger Shuler, in order to try and stop the alleged affair of a former state governors son. Now, this guy is notorious for 'exposing' government secrets being held from the public. He runs a blog called Legal Schnauzer; the platform he uses to get his stories out.
Well, this passionate blogger said to hell with the government and that dudes son! What did he do? He posted the blog anyways and was immediately charged with contempt of court and resisting arrest, what a guy *clap clap clap* Also he explained to his wife afterwards that he was 'roughed up' as well.
Now, it wasn't easy finding an article i wanted to write about with this one, a lot of it was boring. This was the 3rd article i read, and when i was done it hit me like a rock.
FREEDOM OF SPEECH?! WE USE PUFFERY LIKE AN ADVERTISEMENT! The government should be allowed to suppress things from getting out to the public that could hurt the public itself. But one former governors son had an affair and this guy gets slapped with cuffs for posting it on his blog?...
It started to get me thinking of what the government really cares about. Yes there are crazies out there who say the government is out to get us all, and then there are crazies saying the government only and truly cares about our well being. I'm one of the crazy ones who say actions speak louder than words, and wow what an action they did here. If they will go to such lengths to stop one blog about one son of one former governor, my mind goes to extremes, but not only negative, both sides. So seeing this my mind thought of government conspiracies and 'cover ups' bla bla bla, 99% of which i am not a believer, but if they did this for one guy one blog one alleged affair...what lengths would they go to when things got serious?.. There are conspiracy theories about moon landing and space shuttle explosions that killed astronauts, but they were about to expose how inexperienced the USA was in rocket expansion. They next time they were to go to the moon...Boom..rocket blew up and the door was magically sealed shut, preventing the astronauts from getting out. Official word was there was a leak in the gas tank, and the door was actually never sealed shut. This one of 2 of the conspiracy theories that i'm in the middle on (i dont stay awake thinking of conspiracies..). But, after reading this, i may think twice before saying it wasn't the governments fault.


https://www.rcfp.org/browse-media-law-resources/news/alabama-blogger-jailed-after-violating-prior-restraint-over-articles

Comments

  1. AnonymousOctober 24, 2017 at 2:32 PM

    This whole situation is weird. Originally, the issue was defamation-- the subjects of the blog post claim the post is not true and sought a court order to get the posts removed. The judge granted a restraining order, saying that Shuler needed to remove the post and could not publish any other defamatory statements about these people. Most lawyers believe that the judge's order was much too broad and violates Shuler's first amendment rights. What gets weird is his reaction, he skipped hearings-- which resulted in him losing, and he then refused to accept the court's decision. He was arrested for contempt and resisting arrest. He refused to hire lawyers, insisted on representing himself and in a hearing claimed that the court had no jurisdiction over him and that it was a joke. The judge decided that hearing served as a "trial on the merits" and made final ruling that Shuler could not publish anything about the governor's son and alleged mistress.

    The real issue here was Shuler's refusal to truly engage in the legal process, if he had hired a lawyer he probably would have won as most lawyers believe the judge's ruling was a violation of his right to free speech. So its not as simple as "a guy getting slapped with cuffs for posting on his blog."

    I would also note, that this is also one judge's decision, so I think it is hard to make broad judgments about the government as a whole based on this one case. I am assuming if other judges had this case, if it got appealed, this judge's ruling would not have held up.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/12/us/bloggers-incarceration-raises-first-amendment-questions.html?_r=1

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Gamifying Citizenship

The historical context of freedom of speech is an extremely interesting one. Why is it that the concept of free speech has been an undying one and has span the history of human communication. Breaking free speech in to three traditional rationals makes the concept easier to understand and definitely makes sense. These three modes of freedom of speech are philosophical, political and individual. They are easy to distinct from one another and function in completely different ways. From a philosophical level, free speech is a device of truth. That if people are able to speak freely and let their ideas compete, "in the long run the truth will prevail" according to Tedford and Herbeck. I find this interesting, because in my mind, this is the most important facet of free speech. I say this, because I find free speech essential for any kind of societal advancements. If people are not allowed to speak their mind and share their ideas, or discredit others ideas, how is a society supp...
1 comment
Read more

Wedding Cake Court Case (make-up post)

Wedding cake court case involving a gay couple, Charlie Craig & David Mullins, and a cake baker, Jack Phillips, who refused to bake a wedding cake for the couple. Just all around, it's a tricky debate with many different angles due to the baker arguing on the grounds of the First Amendment---its protections for free speech and the free exercise of religion. In the end, I think it comes down to whether we consider baking a cake qualifies an exercise of freedom of expression. I would say that it depends on the situation/context of baking. If Mr. Phillips wants his cake baking to be categorized artistic expression that falls under free expression, he can just go bake a cake on his own. Only then when he's on his own private time does it qualify, but as soon as he offered his skills as a public service via his business, I'd argue he gave that right to expression up. Also, what's stopping other artisans/professional services to deny services? By Mr. Phillip's logic...
Post a Comment
Read more

Why is Freedom of Speech Important in a Democracy

While reading Chapter 15, I got the sense that the book was really coming full circle. In the first week of class, we established a meaning for freedom of speech and that shared meaning allowed us to navigate the classroom together as a classroom and a collective group. Creating a space that also involved mutual respect of opinons but encouraging difference in them as well. This brings me to an article I found about the importance of Freedom of Speech in a democracy. It is a basic human right to be able to express opinions and beliefs in our country. Although that is the main component, just like we established in class the first few weeks, in a government and democracy, Freedom of Speech also consists of the ability to listen to people with difference in opinions. In the article , editor Rachael  Jolly says, “ We are going through a time where people don’t want to be on a panel with people they disagree with. But we should feel comfortable being in a room with people who disagree ...
4 comments
Read more