New York Times v. United States (1971)

AP GOV Unit 2

Provide some background information about the case:

A former military analyst leaked the Pentagon papers to The New York Times and later to The Washington Post. The "Pentagon Papers" were a top-secret Department of Defense study that revealed that the U.S. government (specifically under Johnson) had lied to Congress and the public about the extent of U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War.

What was the prior restraint?

Prior restraint refers to governmental actions that prohibit speech or other expression before it can take place, often seen as a violation of the First Amendment rights.

What was the descision?

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of the New York Times, allowing publication of the Pentagon Papers, emphasizing that prior restraint on the press was unjustified under the First Amendment.

What was the government arguing?

The government (Executive Branch) argued that the publication of the Pentagon Papers would threaten national security and would undermine military operations by revealing classified information.

What was the Newspaper arguing?

The New York Times argued that publishing the Pentagon Papers was a matter of public interest and that the government's attempt to prevent publication violated the First Amendment's protection of press freedom.

What were the legal findings?

The Supreme Court found that the government's justification for prior restraint was insufficient, ruling that the First Amendment protects the press from such actions in the interest of transparency and accountability.

What amendments did this case call to question?

The First Amendment and the Sixth Amendment were called into question, addressing issues of press freedom and the right to a fair trial.

What is the sixth amendment?

The Sixth Amendment guarantees the rights of criminal defendants, including the right to a speedy trial, an impartial jury, and legal counsel.

How did this case involve the sixth amendment?

The case involved the Sixth Amendment as it raised concerns about the right to a fair trial, arguing that pre-publication restrictions could prejudice jurors and undermine a defendant's ability to receive an impartial jury.