Judge Susan Illston of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California rules that the gag order provision of the NSL statute amounts to an unconstitutional prior restraint, violating the First Amendment. Because the statute does not require the government to initiate judicial review of the gag order or specify a brief period of restraint, it fails the procedural requirements for prior restraints established by the Supreme Court in Freedman v. Maryland. Additionally, Judge Illston rules that the gag order provision is a content-based restriction on speech that cannot meet strict scrutiny under the First Amendment because the government failed to show that it is “generally necessary to prohibit recipients from disclosing the mere fact of their receipt of NSLs.” The provisions governing judicial review of a gag order are also found to violate the First Amendment and the constitutional requirement of separation of powers. Because they are not severable from the rest of the statute, the government is consequently enjoined from issuing further NSLs. The ruling and the injunction are stayed pending appeal.