First Amendment versus national security

Everyone has his own opinion about this issue but I will quote what Mr. Burside said in the U.S. Supreme court in the movie Nothing But the Truth (2008).

Mr. Burnside (the journalist’s lawyer): And then how will we know if a president has covered up crimes? Or if an army officer has condoned torture? We, as a nation, will no longer be able to hold those in power accountable to those whom they have power over. And what is then the nature of government when it has no fear of accountability? We should shudder at the thought. Imprisoning journalists? That’s for other countries. That’s for countries who fear their citizens, not countries that cherish and protect them.

2 thoughts on “First Amendment versus national security

    1. You are right it is a tough call. But I believe that whatever matter we consider we should be somehow flexible and not go to extreme. Freedom and national security are both necessities. We can’t favor one over the other. I think balance between the two is not easy but we need to struggle to find that balance. Until we find that balance we may sometimes have to compromise our principles, freedom, or national security.

Comments are closed.