In the case of Houchins v. KQED, Inc., et al., 1977, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Sheriff Houchins from Alameda County, California against KQED television station and other media outlets who sought unrestricted access to a county jail for news-gathering purposes. The court held that journalists do not have a constitutional right under either First Amendment or Fourteenth Amendment to government information not available to the public generally nor any special privilege of access to jails over and above that accorded to the general public. It was concluded that prison officials had broad administrative and discretionary authority over institutions they manage; hence their decision on limiting press access did not violate freedom of speech or press rights as long as it wasn't an attempt at concealing violations of inmates' civil rights.

In the dissenting opinion for Houchins v. KQED, Inc., Justice Brennan argued that the majority's decision failed to recognize and protect a fundamental right of public access to information about government operations, particularly within prisons. He asserted that without such access, democratic oversight of these institutions would be impossible. The denial by prison officials of requests from journalists or citizens for unguided tours was seen as an infringement on First Amendment rights because it limited their ability to gather news and inform the public about conditions inside prisons. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's view that alternative means of obtaining information were sufficient; in his perspective, firsthand observation is crucial for accurate reporting and cannot be replaced by secondhand accounts or official reports which may not fully disclose all relevant facts.