Draft:Butterworth v. Smith
This is a draft article. It is a work in progress open to editing by anyone. Please ensure core content policies are met before publishing it as a live Wikipedia article. Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL Last edited by I dream of horses (talk | contribs) 38 days ago. (Update)
Finished drafting? or |
Butterworth v. Smith (1990) was a court case regarding a newspaper reporter: Smith who wanted to publish a story about the grand jury testimony of a case, regarding claimed improper behavior from local public officials. He was called to testify before a Florida grand jury, to speak about the allegations. During the trial Smith was informed that a state statute prevented grand jury witnesses from disclosing a testimony. Doing so could lead to criminal charges against him. He claimed that this was an infringement of his first amendment right; freedom of speech. As well as an injunction to prevent the state from disclosing his testimony. He filed his claims in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida.
Factual
[edit]Michael Smith, who was a reporter for Charlotte Harold-News, was writing a report and has gathered information that concerned alleged wrongful conduct in the county’s state attorney’s office and sheriff’s department. Summoned to testify before a Florida grand jury investigating the claims, Smith complied.
Following the conclusion of the grand jury’s investigation, Smith wanted to write about both the information he had uncovered and his experience testifying before the grand jury. However, a Florida statute at the time barred him from revealing his grand jury testimony. Consequently, Smith filed a lawsuit in a U.S. district court, arguing that the statute infringed upon his free speech rights.
Supreme Court decision
[edit]On March 21, 1990, the court ruled unanimously in favor of Smith stating that it is unconstitutional to violate a witness’ First Amendment rights. Therefore, states may not forbid jury witnesses from revealing their testimony in a court case after the case has closed.
Opinion of the Court
[edit]The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on the scope of the First Amendment concerning the freedom of speech and the right to access public records. The Court held that the dissemination of information in public records is protected under the First Amendment, and restrictions on this dissemination must be narrowly tailored to serve a significant government interest.
The opinion emphasized the importance of transparency and the public's right to access information, indicating that the government cannot impose broad restrictions on releasing public documents without a compelling justification. Ultimately, the decision underscored the balance between governmental interests and individual rights to free expression.
References
[edit]