The Daily Alaska empire., 1947-06-16
Courts and the Press
Washington Post)


 There is cause for satisfaction in the Supreme Courts latest reafrmation of the principle of press freedom put the exercise of this freedom which gave rise to the case determined by the Court recently Craig Harrey afford the newspaper profession no occasion at all for pride The case entailed the validity of a ruling by Texas county judge that the publisher editorial writer and reporter of news papers published in Corpus Christi Tex, were guilty of contempt of court The newspapers had eroneousy reported a trial conducted by the judge, had ie- nounced his decision and disparaged his competence while a motion for retrial was pending before lim and had threatened him with the wrath of public opinion" Mr Justice Douglas, delivering the verdict of the Supreme Court said of the news stories that they did reflect good reporting, for they failed to reveal the precise before the judge and of the editorial comment that it contained strong language incorporate language and we assume an unfair crti- cism" It scarcely be denied that the newspapers were guilty at the very least, of irresponsbility
 But responsibility is not to be equated with con- tempt The Supreme Court held last year in case involving the Miami Herald and earlier in the Bridges case that press comment pending cases is punish able by contempt only on showing that the utter ances created clear and present danger" to the administration of justice This is, we think, the only sound standard that be applied For fairness like truth is indeterminable. If judge could silence
 newspaper by threatening to punish 1t for contempt whenever he deemed it's criticism unreasonable or irresponsible freedom of the press would be inhibited indeed.
 It would be naive worse, however, to gloss over the danger which irresponsible criticism presents to the independence of the judiciary. MT Justice Jackson in dissenting opinion, made an impressive argument that the conduct of the Corpus Christi newspaper did in fact, present clear and present danger" to the administration of justice The judge he said was put in position in which he either must appear to yield his judgment to public clamor or to defy rubic sentiment" Judges are but human; they should, of course, be mpervious to criticism and to popular sentiment but they may not be especially when, this situation, they are elected for brief term Yet every elected official legislative as well as judicial is subject to such pressure. We do not see how they be assured Of immunity from it without fatal impairment of press freedom
 The issue before the Supreme Court really entailed a weighing ot relative dangers-the danger of news paper responsibility compared with the danger of arbitrary judiciary authority. We think the Court chose the lesser danger There is a graver peril to general freedom restraining criticism than in per- mitting it on occasion become unbrdled. But this is bv no means deny that abuse of freedom by the press calls mperatively for discipline Freedom of the press inalienabe right. It is privi- ege granted by society the utitaran theory that it will be conducive to the general welfare And news papers remember that if it is So wdley abused as to fail it's purpose it will in time be curtaied or withdrawn by the society which conferred it.