Which best describes what the government had to prove for its censorship of the New York Times to have been acceptable?

A:The articles would have had to indisputably harm the nation.

B:The articles would have had to potentially threaten national security.

C:The articles would have had to reveal classified information.

D:The articles would have had to support the enemy in wartime.

Question

Nylah Huff

Social Studies

26 July, 11:51

Which best describes what the government had to prove for its censorship of the New York Times to have been acceptable?

A:The articles would have had to indisputably harm the nation.

B:The articles would have had to potentially threaten national security.

C:The articles would have had to reveal classified information.

D:The articles would have had to support the enemy in wartime.

+3

Answers (2)

Know the Answer?

Olson · Answer 1

I believe the answer is: : A. The articles would have had to indisputably harm the nation.

The piece that published by journalist are protected by the constitution under the first amendment., even though it may be biased and opinionated.

The first amendment could be overlooked if it used to create some sort of threats or harms to the national stability.

Makai Pope · Answer 2

The articles would have had to indisputably harm the nation is the one that best describes what the government had to prove for its censorship of the New York Times to have been acceptable. The correct option among all the options that are given in the question is the first option or option "A". The people needed to be satisfied about the correctness of the step taken by the government.