On Dec 9, 2010, at 5:03 PM, Riley McIntire wrote: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._United_States > > I have not read the article above but am aware of the ruling. The > extent and applicability of it to wikileaks is currently disputed by > the US. > > Riley
Of course it's "disputed by the US". The government got embarrassed by 1) not keeping proper security on their "confidential" (and likely excessively classified) documents and 2) by the contents of those documents. They don't want people to read them and continue be embarrassed further, just as Nixon, the Feds and especially the DoD didn't want anyone to read the Pentagon Papers, either. The government can "dispute" all they want. It's up to the courts to decide if that disputation has any merit. And for almost 40 years the courts have sided with "Times" and the First Amendment. So, though our increasingly conservative courts just might decide in favor of those who want to apply prior restraint to the reach of the First Amendment, we won't know until there's a case that's actually adjudicated. So far a case hasn't even been brought by the government. There's likely a reason. Arthur Gaer [email protected] Senior Systems Manager Harvard University Department of Mathematics 1 Oxford Street Cambridge, MA 02138 617-495-1610 _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators http://lopsa.org/
