Question

In the New York Times v. United States case, Justices Byron White and Thurgood Marshall said they were reluctant to impose a prior restraint on a newspaper in the absence of:

a) Clear and present danger
b) Government approval
c) National security threat
d) Public outcry

Answer 1

In the case of New York Times v. United States, the reluctance of Justices Byron White and Thurgood Marshall to impose prior restraint was notably in the absence of a substantial national security threat. The Supreme Court's ruling underlined the high burden for the government to justify such censorship and reinforced the protection of freedom of the press.

Step-by-step explanation:

In the landmark case, New York Times v. United States (1971), often referred to as the Pentagon Papers case, Justices Byron White and Thurgood Marshall expressed their reluctance to impose a prior restraint on the publication of the Pentagon Papers by newspapers, in the absence of a national security threat. This judicial hesitancy aligned with the Supreme Court's precedent that the government cannot engage in prior restraint—meaning it cannot prevent publication in advance—without a compelling and significant reason, hinging upon significant, demonstrable harm to national security.

The Court ruled that the government's burden to justify such a prior restraint is exceptionally high, indicating that only in extreme situations where there is a clear and present danger to the security of the United States could they constitutionally impose such a measure. The case ultimately emphasized the importance of freedom of the press and set a precedent for limiting the government's ability to censor the media, balancing this against potential risks to national security.