Dissent

There would three dissenting opinions on this case, from Chief Justice Burger, Justice Blackmun, and Justice Harlan. From each of these three justices we see that they felt that there was not enough time to really decide on this case. You see in each of their arguments of dissent that this case passed through the courts far too quickly. As Justice Blackmun put it, “Two federal district courts, two United States courts of appeals, and this Court -- within a period of less than three weeks from inception until today -- have been pressed into hurried decision of profound constitutional issues on inadequately developed and largely assumed facts without the careful deliberation that, one would hope, should characterize the American judicial process.” (http://www.lectlaw.com/)
Beside the issue of the case being rushed, there was also the argument of whether or not the First Amendment should be viewed as absolute. Many of the consenting Justices, and previous precedent has usually ruled in favor of the First Amendment being an absolute, but should this continue? Chief Justice Burger, in his dissenting statement said “In these cases, the imperative of a free and unfettered press comes into collision with another imperative, the effective functioning of a complex modern government, and, specifically, the effective exercise of certain constitutional powers of the Executive. Only those who view the First Amendment as an absolute in all circumstances -- a view I respect, but reject -- can find such cases as these to be simple or easy.” (http://www.lectlaw.com/) Should we maintain the First Amendment as absolute or should we look at it differently now that things have progressed? Especially as we look today to television and the internet. Did the Founding Father’s ever imagine that information could travel so far so fast?