exemption of the press is established in the First Amendment of the United States Constitution , which states that " Congress shall make no law … abridging the exemption of speech , or of the press . " Although the text of the amendment only specifically prohibits infringement by Congress , theSupreme Courthas broaden the scope of the First Amendment to protect the freedoms of speech and mechanical press from censoring by any administration entity , from the Union government down to the local police .
However , the Supreme Court has also recognized specific situation in which the government is provide to limit the exemption of the press .
There are sound limit point , for instance , to how much protection a reporter can provide a confidential reference . Reporters often bank on confidential sources for inside selective information that exposes government or corporate depravity . But if the source assault a Union police in leaking the data to the press , the reporter can be subpoenaed and demand to name names , as established by the Supreme Court ’s 5 - 4 decision in Branzburg v. Hayes ( 1972 ) [ reference : Smolkin ] .
In 2005 , New York Times newsman Judith Miller served 85 days in gaol for disrespect of royal court when she pass up to name the author who leaked the identity of undercoverCIAagent Valerie Plame [ origin : Miller ] . The undermentioned year , two reporter for the San Francisco Chronicle also served jail time for refuse to name the source who leaked closed grand jury testimonies from the Barry Bonds perjury slip [ source : SFGate.com ] .
calumny is also prohibited by law of nature in specific cases . obloquy is the combat injury of an mortal ’s reputation either by written or talk parole . aspersion by the press is bid libel . In the landmark 1964 case New York Times Co. v. Sullivan , the court ruled that the press is not guilty of libel againstpublicfigures unless the injured company can prove factual malevolence — knowingly and recklessly publishing fake information — rather than simple reckless reporting . The ruling swipe restrictions on the insistency that had prevented it from reporting amply on the civil right movement in the South .
However , the Court rein in later decisions that the press can still be launch guilty of libel in defamation cases affect individual citizens and private matters without substantiation of real venom [ source : Legal Information Institute ] .
It ’s authoritative to understand that in most cases , exemption of the public press is indistinguishable to exemption of lecture under the police . member of the medium revel the same rights — and are open to the same restrictions — as members of the general public [ source : Legal Information Institute ] . However , some province have passed cuticle Pentateuch that offer journalist stronger protections against accusations of libel or naming confidential sources in non - Union cases .
lewdness is another a type of speech or published material that is not protected by the First Amendment . In its opinion on the 1973 case of Miller v. California , the Supreme Court established the " Miller test , " also called the three - prong obscenity test , for deciding what character of material restrict as obscene [ rootage : Cohen ] . The material must be nauseating to an average citizen applying " contemporary community standards " and have no redeeming " literary , aesthetic , political , or scientific value . "
Another limit on the wardrobe concerns speech communication designed to incite immediate fierceness or unlawful activity . These prohibition were found in two freestanding rulings . In the 1969 case Brandenburg v. Ohio , the court of justice ruled that only oral communication that is " head to inciting or producing impendent anarchical action " can be legally censored . In an early decision , Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes compared such voice communication to hollo fire in a crowded house , create a " clear and present danger " [ source : Cohen ] . " Fighting words " are also illegal . In Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire ( 1942 ) , the Court ruled that speech that " inflict injury or run to incite an quick breach of the peace " has so social value and can be curtailed [ source : Legal Information Institute ] .
