Pentagon Papers Case Vindicates Julian Assange | WHAT REALLY HAPPENED

Pentagon Papers Case Vindicates Julian Assange

Under the First Amendment, affirmed by the Supreme Court in the Pentagon Papers case, analogous to the Trump regime v. Assange, no one may be lawfully punished for truth-telling — not journalists or anyone else.

In wanting Julian Assange extradited to the US for prosecution under the long ago outdated Espionage Act relating to WW I, the Trump regime aims to reverse the landmark Supreme Court Pentagon Papers ruling.

Arguing to uphold speech and press freedoms when the case was heard by the High Court, Justice Hugo Black said the following:

The government’s injunction to prohibit publication by the NYT and Washington Post “should have been vacated without oral argument when the cases were first presented,” adding:

“(E)very moment’s continuance of the injunctions…amounts to a flagrant, indefensible, and continuing violation of the First Amendment.”

“The press was to serve the governed, not the governors. The government’s power to censor the press was abolished so that the press would remain forever free to censure the government.”

“The press was protected so that it could bare the secrets of government and inform the people.”

“Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government.”

“And paramount among the responsibilities of a free press is the duty to prevent any part of the government from deceiving the people and sending them off to distant lands to die of foreign fevers and foreign shot and shell.”

“(W)e are asked to hold that…the executive b ranch, the Congress, and the judiciary can make laws…abridging freedom of the press in the name of ‘national security.’ ”

“To find that the president has ‘inherent power’ to halt the publication of news…would wipe out the First Amendment and destroy the fundamental liberty and security of the very people the government hopes to make ‘secure.’ ”

“The word ‘security’ is a broad, vague generality whose contours should not be invoked to abrogate the fundamental law embodied in the First Amendment.”

“The guarding of military and diplomatic secrets at the expense of informed representative government provides no real security.”

“The framers of the First Amendment, fully aware of both the need to defend a new nation and the abuses of the English and colonial governments, sought to give this new society strength and security by providing that freedom of speech, press, religion, and assembly should not be abridged.”

Webmaster's Commentary: 

Punishing people for telling the truth, is an anathema, in a truly democratic society, which unfortunately, the Unhinged, Surveilled State of America, is not any more.

Comments

SHARE THIS ARTICLE WITH YOUR SOCIAL MEDIA