To access this feature, please Log In or Register for your Casebriefs Account.

Add to Library




Pell v. Procunier

Citation. 417 U.S. 817, 94 S. Ct. 2800, 41 L. Ed. 2d 495, 1974 U.S.
Law Students: Don’t know your Studybuddy Pro login? Register here

Brief Fact Summary.

Members of the press were denied access to interview prison inmates in a face-to-face format.

Synopsis of Rule of Law.

The First Amendment does not guarantee the press special access to places not generally open to the public. The press has no right of access to prisons or inmates beyond what is given to the public.


Pell (Petitioner) challenges the constitutionality of the California code prohibiting press interviews with prison inmates. All requests to interview inmates in California prisons were denied.


Is it unconstitutional to prohibit the media physical access to prison inmates?


No. The information sought can still be acquired via alternative means of communication. Therefore, the freedom of press is not denied in any way.


This regulation improperly restrains the press from reporting on governmental conduct.


The right to speech includes the right to communicate to any willing listener including members of the press. In this case, inmates could communicate via mail with the press. The state legitimately limits visitors to those who will be helpful in the rehabilitation of the inmate. The state interest in maintaining security of the facilities outweighs the right to speak to the press especially since there are viable alternative means of communication.

Create New Group

Casebriefs is concerned with your security, please complete the following