# United States Supreme Court strikes down a Minnesota law used to shut a newspaper

Published 2026-09-22. Last reviewed 2026-09-22. 1 source.

Status: historical, as of 2026-09-22.

A Hennepin County attorney used Minnesota's 1925 Public Nuisance Law to shut down The Saturday Press, a Minneapolis paper accusing officials of corruption. In 1931 the Supreme Court of the United States struck the law down, ruling that stopping a paper before publication was itself a form of press controls.[1][2][3]

- Country: [United States](https://thewaronnews.com/countries/us) (RSF 2026 rank: 64th of 180)
- Where: United States
- Level of government: State or province
- Tactic: Prior restraint
- Stage: Silence (ladder: https://thewaronnews.com/ladders/prior_restraint#stage-silence)
- Head of government at the time: [Theodore Christianson](https://thewaronnews.com/leaders/theodore-christianson)
- Issue of the day: The Saturday Press had run articles accusing Minneapolis officials, police and a local gangster of corruption and racketeering, allegations the county attorney treated as scandalous and defamatory under the state's 1925 nuisance law.
- Outcome: Reversed, June 1, 1931. The Supreme Court of the United States struck down the Minnesota law 5 to 4 as a restraint on publication in advance that the Constitution did not allow.
- Era: The 1920s

## What happened

Minnesota's 1925 Public Nuisance Law let a judge permanently shut any newspaper or periodical found to be malicious, scandalous or defamatory. In 1927 the Hennepin County Attorney, Floyd Olson, used the law to close The Saturday Press, a Minneapolis weekly run by Jay Near that had accused local officials and gangsters of corruption. Near appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States, the country's highest court, arguing the law violated the free-press guarantee that the First Amendment applies to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause. On June 1, 1931, the Court ruled 5 to 4 in Near v. Minnesota that the law amounted to a prior restraint the Constitution did not allow, meaning government could not stop publication in advance, even of material later found libelous; a publisher could still be sued afterward, but the paper itself could not be shut down first. The decision became the foundation of later United States rulings against government orders blocking publication before it happens.[1][2][3]

## What reason was given

Minnesota officials said the Public Nuisance Law applied to papers that habitually published malicious, scandalous or defamatory material, and treated The Saturday Press's allegations against local officials as exactly that kind of publication.[2]

## What changed for reporting

The Saturday Press was shut down under the injunction; after the Supreme Court's ruling, states lost the power to close a newspaper in advance for its content, though publishers remained open to being sued afterward.[3]

## Timeline

- 1927: United States Supreme Court strikes down a Minnesota law used to shut a newspaper

## Who acted

| Name | Role in this incident | Office at the time |
| --- | --- | --- |
| [Floyd B. Olson](https://thewaronnews.com/actors/floyd-olson) | enforced | Hennepin County Attorney, Minnesota |
| [Theodore Christianson](https://thewaronnews.com/actors/theodore-christianson) | other | Governor of Minnesota |

## Sources

1. Near v. Minnesota, 283 U.S. 697 (1931). https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/283/697/ (Justia US Supreme Court Center, 1931-06-01).

## Claims cited

[1] The Supreme Court held that letting officials bring a newspaper's publisher before a judge on a charge of publishing scandalous material was itself a form of censorship. Quote: "This is of the essence of censorship." Source: Justia US Supreme Court Center, 1931-06-01. Near v. Minnesota, 283 U.S. 697 (1931). https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/283/697/ Claim: https://thewaronnews.com/claims/120, checked 2026-09-22.

[2] The Court said the central purpose of the free-press guarantee was to stop government from restraining publication in advance, while leaving a publisher open to being sued for libel afterward. Quote: "The chief purpose of the guaranty is to prevent previous restraints upon publication. The libeler, however, remains criminally and civilly responsible for his libels." Source: Justia US Supreme Court Center, 1931-06-01. Near v. Minnesota, 283 U.S. 697 (1931). https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/283/697/ Claim: https://thewaronnews.com/claims/121, checked 2026-09-22.

[3] The Court found the Minnesota statute's real effect was not to punish one defamatory issue but to place the publisher under an ongoing system of censorship. Quote: "The statute not only operates to suppress the offending newspaper or periodical, but to put the publisher under an effective censorship." Source: Justia US Supreme Court Center, 1931-06-01. Near v. Minnesota, 283 U.S. 697 (1931). https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/283/697/ Claim: https://thewaronnews.com/claims/122, checked 2026-09-22.

Source page: https://thewaronnews.com/incidents/1931-us-near-v-minnesota-gag-law. The War On News, CC BY 4.0.