The Supreme Court Decision of Miami Herald Publishing Co. V. Tornillo
In 1972 the MiamiÃ?¯Ã?¿Ã?½Herald Newspaper printed two articles that crticized the teacher’s labor union leader Pat Tornillo. Tornillo was also a possible candidate to run for the House of Representatives for the state of Florida. Tornillo then requested that the Miami Herald publish his comments to the article verabtim in the paper. The Miami Herald refused and Tornillo filed a suit in court claiming that the newspaper violated the Florida 1913 statute of the “right to reply” to negatively published articles.Ã?¯Ã?¿Ã?½
When the case was heard by the circuit court, the court declared the statute unconstitutional. In the appeal to the Florida Supreme Court, the court revered the circuit court decision and declared that the Florida statute was in fact legal. The Florida Supreme Court stated that the right to reply law furthered the “broad social interest in the free flow of information to the public.”Ã?¯Ã?¿Ã?½
When the U.S. Supreme Court heard the case, they reversed the decision of the Florida Supreme Court. The U.S. Supreme Court decared the statute unconstitutional and claimed that it was a violation of the First Amendment of freedom of the press. The final vote was unanimous of 9-0 declaring the statute unconstitutional and voting in favor of the Miami Herald. Chief Justice Warren Burger stated that “The choice of material to go into a newspaper, and the decisions made as to the limitations on the size and content of the paper and treatment of public issues and officials- whether fair or unfair constitute the exercise of editorial control and judgement.”
The court held that freedom of the press must not be violated and officials could not regulate the papers. The decision was wrotten by Chief Justice Burger and Justices Brennan, Rehinquist, and White wrote concurring opinions.
