ABSTRACT
In Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Tornillo, 418 US 241, the US Supreme Court considered whether government could force the print media to publish specific editorial content without infringing the right to a free press under the First Amendment to the US Constitution. Citing Florida's 1913 right-of-reply law, Tornillo demanded that the Herald print his replies verbatim. He convinced the Florida Supreme Court that the compulsory right of reply enhanced rather than abridged the First Amendment and furthered the free flow of information to the public. The US Supreme Court was unpersuaded. Citing Florida's 1913 right-of-reply law, Tornillo demanded that the Herald print his replies verbatim. The justices unanimously held that enforced-access laws trespassed on newspapers' editorial discretion, observing that "A newspaper is more than a passive receptacle or conduit for news, comment, and advertising." The Court acknowledged Tornillo's argument that contemporary newspapers often are monopolies, owned by large chains with vast power to shape public opinion.
