Skip to main content

New Jersey, a law that subjects First Amendment licensing, without clear and objective standards, is unconstitutional

New Jersey, a law that subjects First Amendment licensing, without clear and objective standards, is unconstitutional

New Jersey, a law that subjects First Amendment licensing, without clear and objective standards, is unconstitutional In New Jersey, a law that subjects First Amendment freedoms to prior restraint through licensing, without clear and objective standards, is unconstitutional, as it gives the licensing authority undue discretion. 

Here's a more detailed explanation:
  • Prior Restraint and the First Amendment:
    The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and the New Jersey Constitution, protects freedom of speech, including the freedom to express oneself through various means. A "prior restraint" is a government action that prevents someone from exercising their right to speak or express themselves before they actually do so. 
  • Unconstitutionality of Broad Discretion:
    A licensing system that allows a government body to censor or restrict speech before it occurs, without clear guidelines, is considered an unconstitutional prior restraint. This is because it gives the licensing authority too much power to suppress speech based on their subjective opinions. 
  • Need for Narrow, Objective Standards:
    To be constitutional, a licensing system must have narrow, objective, and definite standards to guide the licensing authority. These standards must be clear and easily understood, so that people know what is allowed and what is not. 
  • Examples:
    A licensing scheme that allows a city to censor films before they are shown, or to prevent people from speaking on a public sidewalk, without clear standards, would be an unconstitutional prior restraint. 
  • New Jersey Constitution:
    Article I, ¶ 6 of the New Jersey Constitution states that "[e]very person may freely speak, write and publish his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right". 
  • Case Law:
    The New Jersey Supreme Court has addressed restrictions on speech, including those related to common interest communities and private property. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

New Jersey Rules Of Court

3:2-Contents of Complaints, Arrest Warrant and Summons 3:2-1-Contents of Complaint; Citizen Complaints for Indictable Offenses; Forwarding of Indictable Complaints to Prosecutor and Criminal Division Manager; Forwarding of Investigative Reports to Prosecutor You can read more of the Municipal Courts procedure that the Administrative Judge Law/Municipal Judge Law who is an Administrative Judge. 3:2-2-Summons A summons shall be made on a Complaint-Summons (CDR-1) form, a Uniform Traffic Ticket, a Special Form of Complaint and Summons, or such other form as may be approved by the Administrative Director of the Courts. The summons shall be directed to the person named in the complaint, requiring that person to appear before the court in which the complaint is made at a stated time and place, and shall indicate that there will be consequences for failure to appear at the scheduled first appearance. If the individual fails to appear at that first appearance, a notice shall issue advising the...
Post a Comment
Read more

NJ Transit bus strikes, kills pedestrian. Another person seriously injured Koran Tajhai Dupree Baker, a 25-year-old Newark

  Another Life Lost to NJ Transit: When Will It End? Early Sunday morning, tragedy struck in Newark when an NJ Transit bus hit two pedestrians, leaving one dead and another seriously injured. According to the Essex County Prosecutor’s Office, the incident occurred at 12:18 a.m. on the 400 block of Springfield Avenue. Koran Tajhai Dupree Baker, a 25-year-old Newark resident, succumbed to his injuries at a local hospital. The second victim remains hospitalized, fighting to recover. Here we are in 2025, and NJ Transit buses continue to take lives under Governor Phil Murphy’s administration. How many more people must be injured or killed before real accountability is enforced? It’s time for action. A class action lawsuit needs to be filed against NJ Transit on behalf of all living victims and the families of those who have lost their lives due to reckless bus drivers. These drivers must be held accountable—this is not just negligence; these are murders on wheels . NJ Transit has ...
Post a Comment
Read more
 "The federal statutes that force my opponent to comply with discovery are Fed. R. Civ. P. 26, 34, and 37. Rule 34 requires production within 30 days of a request. Rule 37 allows me to file a Motion to Compel if they fail to produce, and authorizes the Court to impose sanctions, award fees, strike their pleadings, or enter default judgment for willful non-compliance. Rule 37(e) also addresses spoliation of electronically stored information including body-worn camera footage and CAD records. In the District of New Jersey, Local Civil Rule 37.1 required me to complete a meet and confer before filing — which I completed on April 30, 2026." If you are trying to compel discovery and don't know what local rules and statutes govern compliance, you are wasting your time, and showing that you might not know what you are doing and aren't credible. This is akin to the tail wagging the dog or putting the cart before the horse. Sending a notice to opposing counsel achieves nothing...
Post a Comment
Read more