New York Times Co. v. United States (1971)

In 1971, Daniel Ellsberg stole classified information concerning Vietnam, known as the "The Pentagon Papers". He gave them to The New York Times to publish, but the government stopped the printing of the papers and the case was sent to the Supreme Court, under the challenge of the First Amendment right to free speech and press. The government's point was that it could endanger national security. The court issued per curiam, meaning the court gave the verdict as a whole, with separate opinions written (6 concurred, 3 dissented). The per curiam stated that the government had not not carried a "heavy presumption against its constitutional validity". Several justices agreed in their opinions that the press should not be tampered with and that by releasing these papers, that they could not directly cause any imminent danger or harm. Opposing views by other justices provided a good point that the papers could cause increase danger on the battlefield and that there is a question about the limits of the separation of powers. My opinion is leaning more toward a freedom of the press, unless it can be proven with enough evidence that the released information will cause harm to Americans.



The story of Daniel Ellsberg was made into the movie called "The Most Dangerous Man In The World". This provides several opinions and a glimpse of the societal pressures concerning free press and national security