NEW YORK TIMES VS UNITED STATES : CASE SUMMARY
The Supreme Court in New York Times Vs United States (1971) held that publication of classified information related to Vietnam War (Pentagaon Papers) was covered under freedom of press under First Amendment.
FACTS OF THE CASE
United States has been engaged in undeclared war with Vietnam wherein thousands of American had died. The Government was facing criticism from public at large. A classified study titled “History of U.S. decision making Process on Viet Nam Policy” was conducted. Somehow these documents came in possession of New York Times and Washington Post and being published by them. United States sought to restrain publication of these documents by the New York Times and the Washington Post. The matter finally reached to the Supreme Court.
OPINION OF THE COURT
The Supreme Court noted that when Constitution was adopted, many people strongly opposed it because document contained no Bill of Rights to safeguard certain basic freedoms. They feared that new powers granted to a central government might be interpreted to permit government to curtail freedom of religion, press, assembly and speech. James Madison offered a series of amendments to satisfy citizens that these great liberties would remain safe and beyond the power of government to abridge. First Amendment iner alia provided that the people shall not be deprived or abridged of their right to speak, to write, or to publish their sentiments; and the freedom of press, as one of the great bulwarks of liberty, shall be inviolable. The Bill of Rights changed the original constitution into a new charter under which no branch of government could abridge the people’s freedom of press, speech, religion and assembly.
Both history and language of the First Amendment support the view that the press must be left free to publish news, whatever the source, without censorship, injunctions or prior restraints.
The Supreme Court further observed that only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose the deception in the Government. Paramount among the responsibilities of free press is duty to prevent any part of the government from deceiving people and sending them off to distant land to die of foreign fevers and foreign shot and shell. Far from deserving condemnation or their courageous reporting, the New York Times and the Washington Post should be commended for serving the purpose that the Founding fathers saw so clearly.
It was contended by the Government that in spite of First Amendment, the executive department has right to protect the nation against publication of information whose disclosure would endanger the national security. These rights emanate from constitutional power of the President over foreign affairs and his authority as Commander-in-chief.
The Supreme Court noted that the Government was not relying on even any act passed by Congress. The word “security” is broad, vague generality whose contour should not be invoked to abrogate the fundamental law embodied in the First Amendment. The guarding of military and diplomatic secrets at the expense of informed representative government provides no real security for our republic.
DISSENTING OPINION OF JUSTICE BURGER
Justice Burger wrote dissenting opinion. Justice Burger opined that there should be detailed study where there is collision between freedom of press with complex modern government. The Court was unable to gather enough information to make a decision. First Amendment rights are not absolute, there are certain exceptions to it.
IMPACT OF THE CASE
New York Times Vs. United States strengthened the freedom of press in USA. It has also political implications and encouraged a critical view of Vietnam war.
_______________________________________
Mukesh Kumar Suman is an advocate and legal author based at Delhi. He regularly appears before various Judicial Forums including NCLT, NCLAT, High Courts and the Supreme Court. He can be approached at mukesh_suman@outlook.com or +91 9717864570.