Branzburg vs. Hayes

The case of Branzburg v. Hayes began in 1969 when a reporter at Louisville Kentucky named Branzburg wrote a story in the Courier-Journal that wrote how the two local residents made cannabis. This article is very detailed and reveals many facts, including the amount of cannabis sold in general by the two. This article also shows a picture of a substance such as two human hands and plants and it is recognized by readers as marijuana under the heading of the picture.

In 1972, the US Supreme Court, Branzburg v. In the case of Hayes, I raised a question as to whether I can summon a journalist and enforce disclosure of confidential information. Paul Branzburg is a reporter at The Courier-Journal in Louisville, Kentucky, writing articles about drug marijuana. At the time of writing this article, he contacted the two local citizens who made and used the medicine. Because their activities are illegal, Brandsberg promised not to reveal their identity to the two. After the article was announced, Brandsberg was summoned by the local grand jury and ordered to reveal his identity. In defense, Brandsburg dismissed the provision of constitutional revision concerning freedom of the press and cited it.

Branzburg v. In the case of Hayes (1972), the court ruled that the first amendment provision did not give journalists the right to dismiss the subpoena of the major jury. The problem decided in this case is based on refusing to believe that such charges and testimonies "freedom of speech and freedom of press guaranteed by first amendment" "reporter" 5-4 The decision was that the first amendment did not provide such protection. But in a unanimous opinion of Judge Luis F. Powell, the privilege of journalism should be judged by establishing an appropriate balance with freedom of the press and the obligations of all citizens who provide evidence relevant to it "The balance of constitutional and social benefits on a case by case basis is consistent with a cautious and traditional way of arbitrating these problems.