In what became known as the "Pentagon Papers Case," the Nixon Administration attempted to prevent the New York Times and Washington Post from publishing materials belonging to a classified Defense Department study regarding the history of United States activities in Vietnam. The President argued that prior restraint was necessary to protect national security. This case was decided together with United States v. Washington Post Co.
Did the Nixon administration's efforts to prevent the publication of what it termed "classified information" violate the First Amendment?
6-3 for New York Times
Majority Opinions:
Yes. In its per curiam opinion the Court held that the government did not overcome the "heavy presumption against" prior restraint of the press in this case. Justices Black and Douglas argued that the vague word "security" should not be used "to abrogate the fundamental law embodied in the First Amendment." Justice Brennan reasoned that since publication would not cause an inevitable, direct, and immediate event imperiling the safety of American forces, prior restraint was unjustified.
Dissenting Opinion:
Chief Justice Burger wrote the dissent. He argued that while he doesn't necessarily disagree with with the standards established by the majority, he criticized New York Times for how hastily they went with their story. He argued that they should have more thoroughly weighed the societal repercussions of the reporting.