Question

why is \prior restraint\ seen as an unconstitutional limit on a free press?
it would prevent people from suing news outlets that disseminate untruths about them.
it requires news outlets to only get information from approved and legal sources.
it prevents new outlets from printing a story in the first place
it requires news outlets to seek permission to print certain stories about the government.

question 2
1 pts
the right to peaceably assemble enables people to do all of the following except
fill a school district board meeting to protest a decision, so long as the number of people present does not violate fire codes
block roads with crowds so long as the people are orderly and nonviolent
gather in front of an abortion clinic to protest abortions
form a picked line outside of a factory during a strike by a union

Explanation:

• For the first question: Prior restraint is about preventing publication before it happens. The option "It prevents new outlets from printing a story in the first place" aligns with the concept of prior restraint. The other options are about post - publication actions (suing), source requirements (not prior restraint), or permission - seeking (not the core of prior restraint definition).
• For the second question: The right to peaceably assemble does not include blocking roads. Blocking roads, even if orderly and non - violent, disrupts public order and is not a protected form of assembly under the right to peaceably assemble. The other options (filling a meeting within fire code limits, gathering to protest, forming a picket line) are within the bounds of the right to peaceably assemble.

Answer:

1. It prevents new outlets from printing a story in the first place
2. Block roads with crowds so long as the people are orderly and nonviolent