Freedom of Press and

National Security

By Hailee Francom
 Bill of Rights

● The Bill of RIghts was, as Thomas Jefferson states, a necessity in any

government to put restrictions on what the government can do the to
population and individuals.
● On the other hand, the Bill of Rights is on the forefront of the
Constitutional problems we face in modern America
● The Freedom of Press is stated in the First Amendment, preserving
the rights of anyone voicing their news.
The Bill of Rights Today

Supreme Justice Stewart claims the Bill of RIghts is most

important today because dissidents can no longer leave to
the West or past the mountains, because the country is filled
up.

Therefore we rely on the enforcement of the existing laws to

comfortably live in this continually growing country.

- Basically, how far can the first amendment be stretched

by the people and press into national affairs and its need
for secrecy?
 Picture This

The moderator of the discussion starts off by asking a Former CIA

Director to imagine a certain situation.

● The United States decides to take military advancements against

the hostile Sierra Madre
● Possible military action might be taken using exiled Sierra
Madreans.
● A program assistance should step up to opposition forces

To what extent should the public know about these events?

 One Solution

This director claims that there are certain national affairs that should not be talked
about.

He also mentions that the role of the press and the public weigh in heavily on the
actions that they decide to take against Sierra Madre.

To end he states that it is completely impossible for the United States to have a
fully covert operation because of the media.

● No one disagreed over the fact that some national interests are better kept
secret.
What do these Rights Encompass?

Next, one former supreme justice claims that the first amendment
and the implementation of the rights to freedom of press does not
mean the press has to air everything.

● The freedom of speech and the freedom of press are there to

make sure the government does not try to restrict speech or
press
● On the contrary, that does not mean Americans are entitled to
know everything about the national interests and activities
 The Next Scenario

There’s a leak. Someone took the papers off of the CIA’s desk and
ran them straight to the press. What is the legality of this situation?
And what does the press do with it?

● First, the motives of the leaker come into play for some press
members , which is usually disagreement over policies
● One attorney general knows that the press is very smart, and
often knows the motives.
● Other news heads don’t care about the motive, as long as they
are telling truths.
 Legality

One FBI Director says the press has no respect for the law.

Another news head says he wouldn’t account for the consequences of stealing
those documents in pursuit of a good story.

● Supreme justices had difficulty agreeing on whether or not the press should
be punished for publishing news that they knew was stolen
● Further, many could not agree over whether the document was even stolen
property anymore.
● After all, it is a piece of paper, and it could belong to anyone in possession
of it, right?
Role of the Media

● Many agreed that the role of the media is to put out

stories that will give people the basis to form an opinion
on the government
○ How else should society form opinions on their possible leaders?
● Others argue that if the press is putting out stories to
suppress an effort, like the SIerra Madre scenario, then
the press itself is trying to be the government.
Conclusion

The legality of the stolen documents was a varied debate

that judges could not come to a census about.

Most stated they did not want to get involved in the

publication of this story.

● It is the supreme court’s job to enforce existing law, not

to create new policies.
● Further, who’s to say the won’t just go to the next
source once that source is suppressed?