Creative Editing
Chapter 6
Exercise 1
1. Consider the legal implications as you read this account and then answer the questions that follow it.
Shortly after the Three Mile Island nuclear plant in Pennsylvania was shut down because of an accident, a newspaper reporter was told by a former security employee at the plant that plant security was inadequate and lax. To observe the security precautions firsthand, the reporter used the name and credentials of a former college roommate to apply for a job as a guard at the plant. The reporter was hired, and after two weeks of training, he started working full time as a guard.
The reporter worked two weeks at the plant, during which time he made notes about the facility and took photographs of the control room. He told no one there about his affiliation with the newspaper.
After quitting the security guard job, the reporter returned to his newspaper and wrote a series of articles about his experiences and observations at the nuclear plant. Before the stories were published, the reporter revealed his true identity to his former employers and asked to interview them. They refused to be interviewed.
Metropolitan Edison, operator of the plant, went to court seeking an injunction to prohibit publication of the articles. A spokesperson for the company told reporters that the company did not want the reporter to divulge anything that could be detrimental to the security of the plant and the community. The spokesperson said that publication of the articles might expose the plant to terrorist attacks, which would endanger national security.
Answer these questions about this situation:
a. This case involves prior restraint. What is meant by prior restraint?
b. If the court follows the precedent of the Pentagon Papers case discussed in this chapter, what legal test will the court use to decide whether to grant the injunction?
c. Briefly describe the argument that Metropolitan Edison would use to try to persuade the court to issue the injunction.
d. Briefly describe the argument that the newspaper would use against the granting of the injunction.
e. Given your knowledge of precedent, which argument do you think the court will accept?
| BACK TO PREVIOUS CHAPTER |