What was the Supreme Court case New York Times v United States about?

New York Times v. United States, 403 US 713 (1971)

The New York Times and The Washington Post had acquired copies of a classified Department of Defense document, "History of U.S. Decision-Making Process on the Vietnam Policy" (aka the Pentagon Papers) from an unknown source. After the Times published the first in a series of articles related to the sensitive information, President Nixon claimed executive authority to exercise "prior restraint," a legal prohibition against certain First Amendment rights, to force the newspapers to suspend publication of the report.

Attorney General John Mitchell and Assistant District Attorney William Rehnquist sought a court-ordered injunction against the newspapers under Section 793 of the Espionage Act, claiming publication would cause "irreparable injury to the defense interests of the United States." The District and Circuit courts rejected the request.

Both the Times and the United States government appealed to the Supreme Court.

In a 6-3 Per Curiam decision, the Court affirmed the lower court rulings and upheld the right of the newspapers, concluding the government had not met the burden of proof that publication of the Pentagon Papers would create a "grave and irreparable injury" to the United States.

The Court further held that the government hadn't met any of the three exceptions established in Near v. Minnesota, 283 US 697 (1931) allowing them to curb the publishers' First Amendment rights.

1. When a nation is at war, the government can prevent publication of literature that might affect recruitment, per Schenck v. United States, 249 US 47 (1919).
   
   
2. Protection can be suspended to protect the public against incitement to commit acts of violence or overthrow the government.
   
   
3. The primary requirements of decency may be enforced against obscene publications.

In the Opinion of the Court, "Any system of prior restraints of expression comes to this Court bearing a heavy presumption against its constitutional validity," reinforcing the Court's intention to uphold the Constitution in most conflicts. They also stated that the government carries a "heavy burden of showing justification for the imposition of such a restraint," which they had failed to meet.

The New York Times and Washington Post subsequently published portions of the Defense report which revealed, among other things, that the U.S. had deliberately initiated bombing attacks against Cambodia and Laos. This disclosure undermined the government's credibility with its citizens.