1st Amendment Case Study
Free Speech and The First Amendment
Comm 3300
Brief #3
Case: The case was New York Times Co v. United States at was decided on June 30, 1971.
Brief description of the facts of the case: in 1971 the U.S. had been at war with North Vietnam for six years in which many American soldiers had lost their lives in battle and the Administration was currently facing immense dissent from a large portion of the American people. The Nixon Administration tried to prevent the New York Times and Washington Post from publishing materials that belonged to a classified Defense Department study after Daniel Ellsberg copied more than 7000 pages of classified documents that regarded the history of U.S. activities in Vietnam. Ellsberg believed the American people …show more content…
The first article appeared in the the New York Times on June 13, 1971. The next week the newspaper company received on order from a Court District Judge to cease further publication on grounds that the government claimed such publications would result in injury to the defense interests of the U.S. From a constitutional point of view, the government was articulating it’s intent to enforce prior restraint on the newspaper regarding publishing of the study 's findings made by the government. The President argued that prior restraint was necessary for this situation in order to protect national security. The government sought a restraining order that would barring the New York Times from publishing other articles that contained information discovered in the Pentagon Papers. This case was decided together with United States v. Washington Post Co. Justice Black and Douglas argued that the vague term of “security” should not be used to “abrogate the fundamental law embodied in the First Amendment.” Justice Brennan also claimed that since the publication wouldn’t result in an inevitable, direct, and immediate event imperiling American forces’ safety that prior …show more content…
Burger stated a dissenting argument which stated that the the freedom of the press collides with another imperative — the effective functioning of a “modern complex government.” He also argued that there should be an in-depth study of the effects of such actions. He went on to say that in the hast of proceedings, and the size of documents, the Court was not able to obtain an adequate amount of information to make an informed decision on this case. He also argued that the New York Times should have taken the initiative to discuss repercussion to society with the government before published the material. Yet he did not make the argument that the government had met the heavy burden of proof standard. His main point was that the Court’s decision should not have been made so quickly. Justice Harry A. Blackmun and Justice John M. Harlan also joined the the Chief Justice in this argument stating the faults of the proceedings and the the need for more attention toward national security as well as Executive
Comm 3300
Brief #3
Case: The case was New York Times Co v. United States at was decided on June 30, 1971.
Brief description of the facts of the case: in 1971 the U.S. had been at war with North Vietnam for six years in which many American soldiers had lost their lives in battle and the Administration was currently facing immense dissent from a large portion of the American people. The Nixon Administration tried to prevent the New York Times and Washington Post from publishing materials that belonged to a classified Defense Department study after Daniel Ellsberg copied more than 7000 pages of classified documents that regarded the history of U.S. activities in Vietnam. Ellsberg believed the American people …show more content…
The first article appeared in the the New York Times on June 13, 1971. The next week the newspaper company received on order from a Court District Judge to cease further publication on grounds that the government claimed such publications would result in injury to the defense interests of the U.S. From a constitutional point of view, the government was articulating it’s intent to enforce prior restraint on the newspaper regarding publishing of the study 's findings made by the government. The President argued that prior restraint was necessary for this situation in order to protect national security. The government sought a restraining order that would barring the New York Times from publishing other articles that contained information discovered in the Pentagon Papers. This case was decided together with United States v. Washington Post Co. Justice Black and Douglas argued that the vague term of “security” should not be used to “abrogate the fundamental law embodied in the First Amendment.” Justice Brennan also claimed that since the publication wouldn’t result in an inevitable, direct, and immediate event imperiling American forces’ safety that prior …show more content…
Burger stated a dissenting argument which stated that the the freedom of the press collides with another imperative — the effective functioning of a “modern complex government.” He also argued that there should be an in-depth study of the effects of such actions. He went on to say that in the hast of proceedings, and the size of documents, the Court was not able to obtain an adequate amount of information to make an informed decision on this case. He also argued that the New York Times should have taken the initiative to discuss repercussion to society with the government before published the material. Yet he did not make the argument that the government had met the heavy burden of proof standard. His main point was that the Court’s decision should not have been made so quickly. Justice Harry A. Blackmun and Justice John M. Harlan also joined the the Chief Justice in this argument stating the faults of the proceedings and the the need for more attention toward national security as well as Executive