As listed and described in the textbook, set forth the four key rules that are important to understand when the government engages in a prior restraint on speech.

What will be an ideal response?

1) Prior restraints by the government on speech are presumptively unconstitutional and thus the burden falls on the government to prove in court that a prior restraint is justified. 
2) The government's burden in justifying a prior restraint is high, with courts often requiring it to prove there is a compelling interest or an interest of the highest order justifying the restraint. 
3) The scope of any prior restraint (how broadly the restraint is drafted and how much speech is restrained) must be very narrow, so as not to stop publication of any more speech than actually is necessary to effectively serve the government's allegedly compelling interests. 
4) Speech that falls outside the scope of First Amendment protection (obscenity, child pornography, and false advertising, for instance) can be restrained by the government, but only after a judicial proceeding in which a court has determined that the speech indeed is not protected.