skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 30849 Find in a Library
Title: BANS ON INTERVIEWS OF PRISONERS - PRISONER AND PRESS RIGHTS AFTER PELL AND SAXBE
Journal: UNIVERSITY OF SAN FRANCISCO LAW REVIEW  Volume:9  Issue:4  Dated:(SPRING 1975)  Pages:718-737
Author(s): G S MOBLEY
Corporate Author: University of San Francisco Law Review
School of Law
Hendrick Hall
United States of America
Date Published: 1975
Page Count: 20
Sponsoring Agency: University of San Francisco Law Review
San Francisco, CA 94117
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: ANALYSIS OF ARGUMENTS FOR A SPECIAL NEWS-GATHERING RIGHT OF THE PRESS AND FOR A PUBLIC RIGHT TO RECEIVE INFORMATION AND ANALYSIS OF SUPREME COURT DECISIONS REJECTING CLAIMS TO SUCH A RIGHT.
Abstract: IN THE COMPANION CASES OF PELL V. PROCUNIER AND SASBE V WASHINGTON POST CO., THE SUPREME COURT REJECTED FIRST AMENDMENT CLAIMS BY PRISONERS AND THE PRESS, AND UPHELD CALIFORNIA AND FEDERAL PRISON REGULATIONS WHICH PROHIBIT FACE-TO FACE INTERVIEWS BETWEEN PRISONERS AND MEMBERS OF THE NEWS MEDIA. THE CHALLENGED REGULATIONS WERE ESSENTIALLY THE SAME AND ABSOLUTE IN NATURE: PERSONAL INTERVIEWS BETWEEN MEMBERS OF THE NEWS MEDIA AND PRISONERS DESIGNATED BY NAME WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED AT ANY PENAL INSTITUTION UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES. THIS ARTICLE EXAMINES THE COURT'S REASONING AS IT RELATES TO THE CLAIMS RAISED BY THE PRISONERS AND THE PRESS. IN REGARD TO THE PRISONERS' FREEDOM OF SPEECH ARGUMENT, THE ARTICLE COMPARES THE COURT'S APPROACH IN PELL TO CONVENTIONAL FIRST AMENDMENT ANALYSIS AND TO THE APPROACH OF THE MODERN TREND OF PRISONER RIGHTS CASES. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT)
Index Term(s): Constitutional Rights/Civil Liberties; Freedom of speech; Freedom of the press; Judicial decisions; Media coverage; Prisoner's rights; US Supreme Court
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=30849

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.