To install StudyMoose App tap and then “Add to Home Screen”
Save to my list
Remove from my list
The historical conflict between the government and the free press, exemplified by cases like the Pentagon Papers (New York Times Co. v. United States), has raised questions about the boundaries of the First Amendment. The Supreme Court's involvement in The New York Times case reflects disagreements over freedom of speech and press. In this specific situation, The New York Times revealed government deception during the Vietnam War through a Defense Department report known as the Pentagon Papers. This led to public debate over U.S.
participation in the war, with The New York Times asserting their First Amendment right to publish such information.
The Supreme Court's 1971 ruling allowed The New York Times and The Washington Post to publish the classified Pentagon Papers without government censorship. In the mid-1960s, both the public and certain government officials had begun to question America's role in the Vietnam War. Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara initiated an evaluation of US involvement in 1967, resulting in a team of thirty-six individuals compiling a seven thousand-page report titled "History of U.S.
5 (204)
“ She followed all my directions. It was really easy to contact her and respond very fast as well. ”
Decision-Making Process on Vietnam Policy" or the Pentagon Papers. Daniel Ellsberg, a former Marine Corps Company Commander and economist at the Defense Department, assisted in preparing the report after initially supporting America's participation in Vietnam but changing his stance upon witnessing civilian casualties during a two-year volunteer tour of Vietnam.
Daniel Ellsberg believed it was crucial to inform the United States that continuing the war would result in high casualties and improbable victory. In 1969, he disclosed sections of the report to the press, beginning with The New York Times in March 1971. The initial article regarding the Pentagon Papers was published on June 13, 1971, by The New York Times, followed by pieces in The Washington Post on June 18th.
The Nixon Administration was humiliated by the release of the papers, prompting Nixon's attorney general, John Mitchell, to send a telegram demanding The New York Times cease publication. When the newspaper declined, the government filed a lawsuit against them.
The government tried to stop the Pentagon Papers from being published in order to safeguard National Security and hide U.S. actions in Vietnam. Legal action was taken against The New York Times and The Washington Post to block their publication, using the Constitution as a basis for prior restraint. The newspapers contended that this violated the First Amendment by restricting press freedom, leading to a trial at the Manhattan federal courthouse on June 15, 1971.
In a historic move, President Nixon appointed Judge Gurfein to the district court and the administration acquired a restraining order on the publication on the same day. On June 18, the judge denied a standing order but blocked further publication, marking the first time in our nation's history that a court prevented the publication of an article on national security. The New York Times complied with the order. This decision was influenced by a previous case where the Supreme Court made a limited exception to prior restraint. In the case of Near v. Minnesota from 1931, Chief Justice Hughes had noted that ruling against prior restraint could be justified in certain circumstances, such as preventing obstruction to recruiting services or disclosing sensitive military information (Shapiro, par. 3).
After determining that prior restraints are suspicious under the First Amendment, Gurfein reversed his decision and lifted the restraining order, stating that "The First Amendment prohibits censorship by the government in all but the most exceptional cases." The government appealed this ruling while The Washington Post faced a lawsuit for publishing the article. Appeals courts in Washington allowed publication, but New York did not. The legal team for The New York Times contacted Solicitor General Erwin Griswold to appeal to the Supreme Court with a twenty-page petition on June 24 outlining why the case warranted review. This petition included five arguments emphasizing the urgency of the case, particularly challenging its constitutional validity.
The Supreme Court, including justices Hugo Lafayette Black, Potter Stewart, Byron R. White, Thurgood Marshall, Harry A. Blackmun, William J. Brennan Jr., William O. Douglas, John Marshall Harlan II, and Warren E. Burger, agreed to hear the case on June 25 with attorneys Alexander M. Bikel representing The New York Times and Erin N. Griswold representing the United States. Due to the case's public interest and national significance, it quickly moved through the courts allowing only about twenty hours for lawyers to prepare their oral arguments and briefs. Just five days after the case began on June 30, 1971, the Supreme Court issued its decision.
The Supreme Court issued a 6-3 ruling against a prior censorship of the release of the Pentagon Papers. Justices Burger, Blackmun, and Harlan dissented while Justices Black, Brennan, Douglas,
The per curiam statement contained in a website document confirmed that any attempt to censor expression before publication must meet a high standard of justification, as there is a strong presumption against such actions being constitutional.
The District Court for the Southern District of New York, in The New York Times case, and the District Court for the District of Columbia and the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, in The Washington Post case, all agreed that the Government had not met its burden. This decision was supported by a wide range of views among the nine judges involved. They could not reach a consensus on a standard for determining how prior restraint should be handled by the government in future cases. Justice Hugo Black, who supported this decision, emphasized that the Founding Fathers provided protection to the free press in order to maintain its essential role in democracy. He stated that censorship power was abolished so that the press could always remain free to criticize the government (Bruce, par.2; Liptak, par.18).
Justices Warren E. Burger, John Marshall Harlan II, and Harry A Blackmun unanimously held the belief that the swift delivery of the verdict and its implications posed a risk. Despite concurring on their disapproval of the Court's ruling, they each expressed their dissenting perspectives. Their consensus was that the proceedings had been rushed, compromising the ability to reach a considered decision. Justice Blackmun in particular held a grave concern about the verdict.
As per Cengage (par. 23), the release of the Pentagon Papers was cautioned to potentially result in severe outcomes such as casualties among soldiers, strained alliances, compromised negotiations with adversaries, and disrupted diplomatic efforts. Consequently, the number of American troops in Vietnam decreased from 335,000 at the start of 1971 to only 160,000 by year's end (Cengage, par. 24). This incident also had a significant impact on Nixon's presidency as his pursuit to uncover the leak's source ultimately led to the Watergate scandal and his resignation on August 9, 1974.
Justice was served in the case verdict, a win for supporters of Freedom of Press. However, Daniel Ellsberg did not receive justice as he faced criminal charges for stealing the Pentagon Papers, including theft of federal property and spying. His trial in a federal court in July 1972 ended when Judge Byrne discovered the government had illegally recorded Ellsberg’s conversations and stolen files from his therapist. The case was dismissed on May 11, 1973. Ellsberg criticized himself for not acting sooner against the Vietnam War and advocated for whistleblowers to bravely expose secrets to save lives, even if it results in imprisonment (Liptak, par.22).
The 1971 Supreme Court ruling in the Pentagon Papers case was a pivotal event in First Amendment history. It allowed The New York Times and The Washington Post to publish confidential documents without government interference, marking the first time press publication had been halted by the government during appeals. However, the Supreme Court ultimately determined that preemptively limiting freedom of speech violated the First Amendment, solidifying press freedom as a fundamental aspect of First Amendment rights.
The Pentagon Papers Case: Defending Press Freedom. (2016, Dec 19). Retrieved from https://studymoose.com/the-pentagon-papers-case-essay
👋 Hi! I’m your smart assistant Amy!
Don’t know where to start? Type your requirements and I’ll connect you to an academic expert within 3 minutes.
get help with your assignment
