Prior Restraint and Protest Regulation

In United States (‘US’) First Amendment jurisprudence, restrictions on expression in advance of publication are seen as inherently more threatening to expression than subsequent punishments. These restrictions are known as prior restraints. Although the concept of prior restraint is embedded in US law, it has not received analogous attention in Australia. This article interrogates judicial treatment of the concept by Australian courts, and the inconsistencies between its application to the implied freedom of political communication compared to interlocutory injunctions in defamation. It argues that principles of prior restraint can be accommodated in Australian law to strengthen protections of expression. It does so by reference to protest regulation in Australian states and territories, contending that a lens of prior restraint foregrounds harms in the permit and authorisation schemes which apply to public assemblies.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
University of New South Wales Law Journal
Published
2025-04-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.53637/gzgx5935
Primary Topic
European Criminal Justice and Data Protection
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Prior Restraint and Protest Regulation

Catherine Zhou
University of New South Wales Law Journal
European Criminal Justice and Data Protection
article

Prior Restraint and Protest Regulation

Catherine Zhou
article en

Abstract

In United States (‘US’) First Amendment jurisprudence, restrictions on expression in advance of publication are seen as inherently more threatening to expression than subsequent punishments. These restrictions are known as prior restraints. Although the concept of prior restraint is embedded in US law, it has not received analogous attention in Australia. This article interrogates judicial treatment of the concept by Australian courts, and the inconsistencies between its application to the implied freedom of political communication compared to interlocutory injunctions in defamation. It argues that principles of prior restraint can be accommodated in Australian law to strengthen protections of expression. It does so by reference to protest regulation in Australian states and territories, contending that a lens of prior restraint foregrounds harms in the permit and authorisation schemes which apply to public assemblies.

University of New South Wales Law JournalVol. 48(1)
Openalex Percentile: Top 91%
European Criminal Justice and Data Protection
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.