(1) Whether a state may constitutionally prohibit an attorney from making statements to the press that he or she knows or reasonably should know will have a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing an adjudicative proceeding and, if so, (2) whether the State Bar of Nevada properly applied the rule in this case.
Whether the news media have a constitutional right of access to a county jail, over and above that of other persons, to interview inmates and make sound recordings, films, and photographs for publication and broadcasting.
Whether the New York Times and the Washington Post could be enjoined from publishing excerpts from a classified Defense Department study of U.S. involvement in the Indochina War. More broadly, whether the First Amendment protects the publication of "classified information."
Whether a citation for contempt of court could, consistent with the First Amendment, be upheld against a Corpus Christi newspaper which published critical news and commentary about a pending court case, even if that information was not entirely true.
Whether a publisher can be held for contempt for an out-of-court editorial statement concerning a pending criminal case. In a companion case: whether a labor leader was can be held in contempt based on a telegram he sent to the Secretary of Labor regarding a pending case.
Whether a Minnesota statute that allowed "abatement"—an injunction against future publication—of printed material deemed to be a public nuisance constituted an unconstitutional prior restraint in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
Whether a post office regulation compelling newspapers to disclose the names and addresses of all editors and stockholders as well as circulation information, and to mark all paid material "advertisement" violates the First Amendment's free press guarantees.