The principles laid down by the court in this case restrict judges from exercising control over pretrial and during-trial publicity. However, they certainly have control over what takes place in the courtroom. In Near v. Minnesota the Court held that prior restraint against the media could only be imposed by the government in extra ordinary circumstances, such as violation of national security or obscene publications. In the case involving the Nebraska Press Association, the Court unanimously decided that a state trial court judge's restrictive order on the press was unconstitutional since the judge had failed to impose other measures for ensuring a fair trial short of prior restraint. The Court held:
"We reaffirm that the guarantees of freedom of expression are not an absolute prohibition under all circumstances, but the barriers to prior restraint remain high and the presumption against its use intact."