HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017209.jpg
1.89 MB
Extraction Summary
5
People
6
Organizations
2
Locations
2
Events
3
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Manuscript / memoir excerpt (house oversight production)
File Size:
1.89 MB
Summary
This document appears to be a page from a memoir or manuscript (likely by Alan Dershowitz, based on the legal representation described) recounting the 1971 Pentagon Papers case. It details the author's role representing Senator Mike Gravel and Beacon Press, and highlights a specific Supreme Court oral argument exchange between Justice Potter Stewart and Alexander Bickel regarding the balance between the First Amendment and national security. The document is stamped with a House Oversight file number.
People (5)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Narrator | Author/Lawyer |
Represented Beacon Press and Senator Gravel; former student of Alexander Bickel. (Context implies Alan Dershowitz).
|
| Mike Gravel | U.S. Senator (Alaska) |
Convened emergency meeting to place Pentagon Papers in public record; client of the narrator.
|
| Alexander Bickel | Attorney/Professor |
Lead counsel for the NYT in Pentagon Papers case; teacher and friend of the narrator.
|
| Potter Stewart | Supreme Court Justice |
Engaged in debate with Bickel regarding First Amendment hypothetical.
|
| Erwin Griswold | Solicitor General |
Lawyer for the government; former Dean of Harvard Law School.
|
Organizations (6)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| United States Supreme Court |
Venue for the litigation.
|
|
| New York Times |
Newspaper fighting in court to publish the Papers.
|
|
| Washington Post |
Newspaper fighting in court to publish the Papers.
|
|
| Beacon Press |
Publisher of the 'Gravel Edition' of the Pentagon Papers; located in Boston.
|
|
| Subcommittee on Buildings and Grounds |
Senate subcommittee convened by Gravel.
|
|
| Harvard Law School |
Mentioned in relation to Erwin Griswold.
|
Timeline (2 events)
1971
Emergency night-time subcommittee meeting convened by Senator Gravel to place Papers in public record.
Washington D.C.
Relationships (3)
I represented Beacon Press and, subsequently, Senator Gravel in litigation
I also conferred with my teacher and dear friend Alexander Bickel
lead counsel for the Times in the Pentagon Papers case
Key Quotes (3)
"I was one of his lawyers throughout the litigation."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017209.jpg
Quote #1
"No, I’m afraid that my inclinations to humanity overcome the somewhat more abstract devotion to the First Amendment in a case of that sort."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017209.jpg
Quote #2
"I haven’t the slightest doubt myself that the material which has already been published and the publication of the other materials affects American lives and is a thoroughly serious matter."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017209.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,401 characters)
4.2.12
WC: 191694
WC: 191694
was decided against him by the Supreme Court. I was one of his lawyers throughout the
litigation.
litigation.
The release and publication of the Pentagon Papers in 1971 was perhaps the single most
important event in turning American public opinion against the Vietnam War. While the New
York Times and the Washington Post were fighting in court to continue publishing portions of the
Papers, Senator Mike Gravel of Alaska was taking more direct action: he convened an
emergency night-time meeting of his subcommittee on Buildings and Grounds—hard to imagine a
committee less relevant to the Pentagon Papers—and placed the Papers in the public record. The
“Gravel Edition” of the Pentagon Papers was then published by Beacon Press of Boston. I
represented Beacon Press and, subsequently, Senator Gravel in litigation that eventually went to
the United States Supreme Court.
important event in turning American public opinion against the Vietnam War. While the New
York Times and the Washington Post were fighting in court to continue publishing portions of the
Papers, Senator Mike Gravel of Alaska was taking more direct action: he convened an
emergency night-time meeting of his subcommittee on Buildings and Grounds—hard to imagine a
committee less relevant to the Pentagon Papers—and placed the Papers in the public record. The
“Gravel Edition” of the Pentagon Papers was then published by Beacon Press of Boston. I
represented Beacon Press and, subsequently, Senator Gravel in litigation that eventually went to
the United States Supreme Court.
I also conferred with my teacher and dear friend Alexander Bickel, who was lead counsel for the
Times in the Pentagon Papers case. Our cases shared a common constitutional approach and so
we exchanged ideas and drafts.
Times in the Pentagon Papers case. Our cases shared a common constitutional approach and so
we exchanged ideas and drafts.
The difficulty of defending an absolutist view was well illustrated by an exchange between Justice
Potter Stewart and Professor Bickel. Stewart asked Bickel about “a hypothetical case:”
Potter Stewart and Professor Bickel. Stewart asked Bickel about “a hypothetical case:”
“Let us assume that when the members of the Court go back and open up this sealed
record we find something there that absolutely convinces us that its disclosure would
result in the sentencing to death of a hundred young men whose only offense had been that
they were nineteen years old and had low draft numbers. What should we do?”
record we find something there that absolutely convinces us that its disclosure would
result in the sentencing to death of a hundred young men whose only offense had been that
they were nineteen years old and had low draft numbers. What should we do?”
Bickel fumbled:
“I wish there were a statute that covered it.” (p. 46)
Justice Stewart persisted:
“You would say the Constitution requires that it be published, and that these men die, is
that it?
that it?
Finally, Bickel answered his hypothetical directly.
“No, I’m afraid that my inclinations to humanity overcome the somewhat more abstract
devotion to the First Amendment in a case of that sort.”
devotion to the First Amendment in a case of that sort.”
The lawyer for the government, Solicitor General Erwin Griswold (former Dean of the Harvard
Law School) did not regard Justice Stewart’s case as hypothetical.
Law School) did not regard Justice Stewart’s case as hypothetical.
“I haven’t the slightest doubt myself that the material which has already been published
and the publication of the other materials affects American lives and is a thoroughly
serious matter.”
and the publication of the other materials affects American lives and is a thoroughly
serious matter.”
122
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017209
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document