Which best describes what the government had to prove for its censorship of the New York Times to have been acceptable? The articles would have had to indisputably harm the nation. The articles would have had to potentially threaten national security. The articles would have had to reveal classified information. The articles would have had to support the enemy in wartime.

Question

Jordyn Cortez

History

29 December, 22:22

Which best describes what the government had to prove for its censorship of the New York Times to have been acceptable? The articles would have had to indisputably harm the nation. The articles would have had to potentially threaten national security. The articles would have had to reveal classified information. The articles would have had to support the enemy in wartime.

+5

Answers (2)

Know the Answer?

Douglas Boyer · Answer 1

the first answer, i just took the quiz

Genevieve Clarke · Answer 2

The correct answer is:

The articles would have had to indisputably harm the nation.

The New York Times Co. v. The United States, (1971) ruling made it possible for The New York Times and The Washington Post newspapers to publish the then-classified Pentagon Papers without risk of government censorship or punishment.

The Supreme Court was entrusted with determining if the Government had adequately met the "burden of showing justification for the imposition of such a restraint", which would be a suspension of the newspapers' First Amendment rights to freedom of the press, according to the grave and probable danger rule, established in Dennis v. United States (1951).