Marsh v. Fulton County was a United States Supreme Court case that was decided in 1870. The case involved a dispute between a Georgia county and a local newspaper publisher. The publisher, William Marsh, had been denied a permit to publish a newspaper in the county. Marsh argued that the county had violated his First Amendment rights by denying him the permit. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Marsh, finding that the county had violated his First Amendment rights. The Court held that the county had no authority to deny Marsh a permit to publish a newspaper, as the First Amendment protects the right to freedom of the press. The Court also held that the county had violated Marsh's due process rights, as it had not provided him with a hearing or an opportunity to be heard before denying his permit. The decision in Marsh v. Fulton County was an important victory for freedom of the press. It established that the government cannot deny a permit to publish a newspaper without providing a hearing or an opportunity to be heard. This decision has been cited in numerous subsequent cases involving freedom of the press.

In Marsh v. Fulton County, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a county ordinance in Georgia that prohibited religious services from being held on public property violated the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. The majority opinion found that it did not violate any constitutional rights and upheld the ordinance as valid. However, Justice Field dissented from this decision and argued that such an ordinance infringed upon citizens' right to freely exercise their religion without government interference or regulation. He further stated that while governments have a legitimate interest in protecting public order, they must do so within reasonable limits set by law and should not be allowed to interfere with fundamental rights like freedom of religion unless there is a compelling state interest at stake. In his view, no such interests were present here since allowing religious services on public property would cause no harm or disruption whatsoever but instead benefit society by promoting morality and good citizenship among its members.