Aggregator
Veterans Festival Displays Global War On Terrorism Memorial Wall
Sultan: The parents' college page is a double-edged sword
Quickly growing, Mexican-inspired fast-food concept planning expansion into St. Louis region
Luxury Meets the Cannabis Industry at Women-Owned 13th and Canna Candles
Sleek. Discreet. Luscious. When you enter 13th and Canna, you’ll catch a whiff of luxury—and absolutely nothing else. After all, that’s the point. Co-founders Tameca Burnett and Sherrell Hall launched 13th and Canna, their innovative line of odor-eliminating luxury candles, in 2021. While the line was specifically inspired by the need to cover the smell […]
The post Luxury Meets the Cannabis Industry at Women-Owned 13th and Canna Candles appeared first on Cherokee Street.
St. Louis County man linked to 2021 murder of local business owner sentenced
Bruce Springsteen adds New Jersey-centric playlist to ‘Live Series’
Barry-Wehmiller investment arm takes stake in growing Indiana-based insurance firm
Blues and Brews Tickets
Former Affton umpire charged with sexually assaulting teen girls
Quickly growing, Mexican-inspired fast-food concept planning expansion into St. Louis region
Judge gets it wrong in censoring the Post-Dispatch
Since May, an unconstitutional prior restraint has stopped the St. Louis Post-Dispatch from publishing a court record that the government accidentally made public.
"File:St. Louis Post-Dispatch (4820144198).jpg" (https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=85503658) by Paul Sableman is licensed under CC BY 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/?ref=openverse).A St. Louis judge doubled down on an unconstitutional prior restraint last week, extending her previous order prohibiting the St. Louis Post-Dispatch from publishing a mental health evaluation of a man accused of killing one police officer and injuring another.
In an op-ed in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF) Deputy Advocacy Director Caitlin Vogus and First Amendment attorney Steve Zansberg explain the laundry list of errors in Judge Elizabeth Hogan’s latest order.
Vogus and Zansberg wrote:
“Prior restraints — laws or court orders barring the publication of information — are the most extreme, and least tolerable form of censorship. … Prior restraints on the press threaten our democracy by allowing the government to control the media landscape.
The Supreme Court has repeatedly said that they are almost always unconstitutional, striking down attempts to stop publication over and over again. Perhaps most famously, in the Pentagon Papers case, the court rejected attempts to prevent newspapers from printing a secret government history of the Vietnam War given to them by whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg. …
Hogan’s ruling, however, doesn’t bother to grapple with Supreme Court precedent, perhaps because that court has never upheld a prior restraint on the press.”