Background/ facts: Jay Near published a scandal sheet in Minneapolis, in which he printed attacks on local officials, writing that they were implicated with gangsters. Minnesota officials obtained an injunction in order to stop Near from publishing his newspaper under a state law that allowed this course of action to be taken against periodicals. The law stated that any person "engaged in the business" of regularly publishing or circulating an "obscene, lewd, and lascivious" or a "malicious, scandalous and defamatory" newspaper or periodical was guilty of a nuisance and could be prevented (stopped) from committing or maintaining the problem.

Issue/ Points of Law: The problem presented questions whether or not the Minnesota "gag law" is in violation with the free press provision of the 1st Amendment.

Decision & Rationale: The Court decided that the statute authorizing the injunction was unconstitutional as accused. The Court stated that the statutory scheme constituted a prior restraint and therefore invalid under the 1^st Amendment.

Results & subsequent cases: Upon the decision favoring Near in Near v. Minnesota. the Court established the constitutional doctrine that prohibited the government from censoring or otherwise hindering a publication in advance (with some narrow exceptions), even though the communication might be punishable after publication in another proceeding (criminal or otherwise).

· This decision was a precedent to the 1971 NY Times v. US case, in which the Court again denied the premise of prior restraint to assert the lst Amendment free press rights.