Near v. Minnesota (1931) established that prior restraint is generally unconstitutional. The correct response from the options you provided is: It is unconstitutional unless information is related to matters of national security. This ruling held that the government cannot impose restrictions on publication or speech in advance, except in very limited circumstances, such as national security concerns.
What did Near v. Minnesota decide about prior restraint?(1 point) Responses It is allowed if malice against a public official can be proven. It is allowed if malice against a public official can be proven. It is allowed when information is reporting on the scandals of public officials. It is allowed when information is reporting on the scandals of public officials. It is unconstitutional unless information is related to matters of national security. It is unconstitutional unless information is related to matters of national security. It is unconstitutional unless information is proven to be false.
1 answer