In the Thirteen Colonies, before the signing of the Declaration of Independence, newspapers and works produced by printing presses were in general subject to a series of regulations.

British authorities attempted to prohibit the publication and circulation of information of which they did not approve, and often levied charges of sedition and libel as a means of controlling printing presses.

In his March 4, 1801, inaugural address, he reiterated his longstanding commitment to freedom of speech and of the press: "If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this Union or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it.

This began a series of federal prosecutions during the Civil War of northern U.S. newspapers which expressed sympathy for Southern causes or criticized the Lincoln administration.

The Bangor Democrat in Maine, was one of these newspapers; assailants believed part of a covert Federal raid destroyed the press and set the building ablaze.

The 1931 U.S. Supreme Court decision Near v. Minnesota recognized freedom of the press by roundly rejecting prior restraints on publication, a principle that applied to free speech generally in subsequent jurisprudence.

[12] In Lovell v. City of Griffin (1938),[13] Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes defined the press as "every sort of publication which affords a vehicle of information and opinion.

The usage in question was when quoting eyewitnesses, but the court ruled that, even if it hadn't, to call it libel "would subvert the most fundamental meaning of a free press".

[6][7][19] This is further supported by the Supreme Court, which has refused to grant increased First Amendment protection to institutional media over other speakers;[20][21][22] In a case involving campaign finance laws, the court rejected the "suggestion that communication by corporate members of the institutional press is entitled to greater constitutional protection than the same communication by" non-institutional-press businesses.

On October 26, 2011, the Stop Online Piracy Act, which opponents said would threaten free speech and censor the Internet, was introduced to the U.S. House of Representatives.

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said that President Obama "[would] not support legislation that reduces freedom of expression.

Its purpose is "to provide reliable, easy-to-access information on the number of press freedom violations in the United States – from journalists facing charges to reporters stopped at the U.S. border or asked to hand over their electronics.

[39][40][41] According to the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker, in 2020, approximately 300 journalists were assaulted in the U.S. (primarily by law enforcement) and at least 110 were arrested or criminally charged in relation to their reporting.