Minnesota Rag Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Minnesota Rag - Essay Example Johan Morrison began to publish the Rip-Saw, this was published weekly which exposed the illegal uses and other vice, which according to Morrison were carried out directly or indirectly by the municipal authorities. Of the targets of the newspapers were the two legislators who weren't satisfied with route to ordinary defamation laws. With the help of the press established as Minnesota they sketched the Public Nuisance Law 1925 which allowed the permanent judge to direct the newspapers from publishing upon a finding that is "customarily or regularly" published "defamatory, malicious and scandalous" material. The defense was a truth given that the intention behind were good for justified ends. This was passed with little or no fame and press didn't show up an opposition, but before Duluth representatives, in order to shut down the Rip-Saw with the help of gag law, Morrison died. (P.14-27) Apart from the above another crisis rose of the whiskey trade from Canada, when Jay Near and an associate started the publication of the scandal sheet of their own called Saturday Press. While the conventional press often soft-pedaled its reporting on vice and corruption, the Press held nothing sacred. Sometimes trustfully but always recklessly, it accused law enforcement and political figures of seizing every available illicit opportunity. Unlike, Morrison, the publishers of the Press were scandalmongers without redeeming moral zeal, and they were frequently accused of using their paper as an instrument of blackmail (p. 32-35). In May 1928, the Minnesota Supreme Court unanimously upheld the law's constitutionality, finding the Press to be a nuisance to public comfort and repose akin to noxious weeds, dogs and houses of prostitution. The court had no difficulty distinguishing "nuisances" like Near's rag from the "the sincere and honest voice of the press," which had no need to fear the statute (p 61). The constitutional guarantee, the court insisted, extends only to the boundaries of propriety; "licentiousness" is unprotected (p. 61-62). Consequently, the court found that "there is no constitutional right to publish a fact merely because it is true" p62. And when the fledgling American Civil Liberties Union announced that it would undertake an appeal to the Supreme Court on Near's behalf (p. .63-64), the Minneapolis Evening Tibune's editorial echoed the court's emphasis on the need to protect only "responsible" journalism: "The Civil Liberties Union will no doubt make a great pother about the freedom of the press, but the legitimate newspapers will be rather bored than excited about it" (p.64-65). Enter Colonel Robert R. McCormick and his Chicago Tribune. Obsessed by government hostility to press freedoms McCormick nudged out the ACLU and assumed the financial burden and strategic control of the case. He believed that Near's accusation about local politicians probably were true (p. 70), and he feared in any event that, unless stamped out quickly, Minnesota technique for suppressing newspapers would spread to other states (p. 78). Client and patron soon developed divergent interest; while Near bridled at delays in resuming his tawdry livelihood, McCormick and his law firm were intent on gaining a constitutional victory at the highest level (p. 77, 84-87). In the end, McCormick had his way. At oral argument before the Supreme Court, Weymouth