Dow Jones Company, Inc v. Simon
| Decision Date | 07 November 1988 |
| Docket Number | No. 88-229,88-229 |
| Citation | 488 U.S. 946,109 S.Ct. 377,102 L.Ed.2d 365 |
| Parties | DOW JONES & COMPANY, INC., et al. v. Stanley SIMON et al |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
In Nebraska Press Assn. v. Stuart, 427 U.S. 539, 96 S.Ct. 2791, 49 L.Ed.2d 683 (1976), we held that an order restraining the news media from reporting or commenting on public judicial proceedings was a prior restraint on speech and that the State had not in that case overcome the high barriers to the use of a prior restraint. Id., at 570, 96 S.Ct., at 2808. The restraining order in this case is directed against the participants in the trial, not against the media, but it is likewise challenged by various news agencies as an unconstitutional prior restraint.
This case arises out of the trial of several criminal defendants, including Representative Mario Biaggi and former Bronx Borough President Stanley Simon, on federal racketeering charges based on their involvement with Wedtech, a South Bronx military contractor. On April 23, 1987, at the request of the defendants, the District Court entered an order restraining the prosecutors, defendants, and defense counsel from making extrajudicial statements to the press. The Government initially concurred in the order but eventually joined with petitioners, the news agencies, in seeking to have the order vacated. On July 10, 1987, the District Court modified its order to allow the parties to state, without elaboration, matters of public record and to explain, without characterization, the substance of any motion or step in the proceedings. Otherwise, however, the court continued the order in force.
Petitioners appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which affirmed the July 10 order. After finding that petitioners had standing to complain, the court stated that "there is a fundamental difference between a gag order challenged by the individual gagged and one challenged by a third party; an order objected to by the former is properly characterized as a prior restraint, one opposed solely by the latter is not." In re Application of Dow Jones & Co., 842 F.2d 603, 609 (1988). Because only the news agencies opposed the restraining order, the court concluded that a prior restraint had not been imposed. The court then held that the restraining order was justified because there was a ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lafferty v. Jones
...these shores—and the order here directed solely against trial participants"), cert. denied sub nom. Dow Jones & Co. v. Simon , 488 U.S. 946, 109 S. Ct. 377, 102 L. Ed. 2d 365 (1988) ; see also Standing Committee on Discipline v. Yagman , supra, 55 F.3d at 1443 ("[w]hen lawyers speak out on ......
-
News-Journal Corp. v. Foxman
...U.S. at 540, 85 S.Ct. at 1632; see In re Application of Dow Jones & Co., 842 F.2d 603, 609 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 946, 109 S.Ct. 377, 102 L.Ed.2d 365 (1988) ("When the exercise of free press rights actually tramples upon Sixth Amendment rights, the former must nonetheless yield t......
-
Walsh v. City of Auburn
...109 S.Ct. 1874, 1881-82, 104 L.Ed.2d 459 (1989); Dow Jones & Co. v. Simon, 842 F.2d 603 (2d Cir.) cert. denied, 488 U.S. 946, 109 S.Ct. 377, 102 L.Ed.2d 365 (1988) (news agencies have standing to challenge gag order). Although a listener's first amendment right presupposes a willing speaker......
-
U.S. v. Aramony
... ... money for this apartment came from a donation that Mutual of America (MOA)--an insurance company that did business with UWA--made to UWA. In 1987, MOA decided to donate the interest from a $1 ... ...
-
Rewriting Near v. Minnesota: Creating a Complete Definition of Prior Restraint - Michael I. Meyerson
...Cir. 1986); Bauer, 522 F.2d at 248. 137. See, e.g., In re Application of Dow Jones & Co., 842 F.2d 603, 609 (2d Cir. 1988), cert, denied, 488 U.S. 946 (1988); but see, CBS v. Young, 522 F.2d 234, 239 (6th Cir. 1975). 138. 501 U.S. 1030 (1991). 139. Id. at 1060. 140. Id. at 1065. 141. Id. at......
-
Segregation, whiteness, and transformation.
...population, but may range from 1% to 60%. See United States v. Starrett City Associates, 840 F.2d 1096, 1099 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 946 (45)See South Suburban Hous. Ctr. v. Greater S. Suburban Bd. of Realtors, 935 F.2d 868 (7th Cir. 1991) (reviewing several measures to encourage ......