The Supreme Court case Mills v. Alabama in 1965 revolved around the issue of free speech and press, specifically concerning a state law that prohibited election day editorials. The appellant, Mills, was an editor who published an editorial on election day urging people to vote a certain way which led to his conviction under Alabama's statute prohibiting such action. He challenged this as unconstitutional interference with freedom of speech and press. The U.S Supreme Court unanimously ruled in favor of Mills stating that the First Amendment rights cannot be curtailed by any state due to its vital role in enabling public discussion on matters of public interest and concern - including elections. Therefore, it held that the Alabama statute violated these constitutional protections.

In the dissenting opinion for Mills v. Alabama, Justice Black argued that states should have the right to regulate election day speech in order to maintain order and prevent chaos at polling stations. He believed that a state's interest in ensuring fair elections outweighed any potential infringement on First Amendment rights. Furthermore, he contended that this regulation did not amount to censorship as it only restricted when certain political messages could be disseminated, not what those messages contained or who could deliver them. Thus, according to him, such laws were content-neutral time restrictions rather than unconstitutional free speech violations.