Laird v. Tatum 408 U.S. 1 (1972)

AuthorMartin Shapiro
Pages1557

Page 1557

Protesters against American involvement in the VIETNAM WAR sued to stop Army intelligence surveillance which they claimed had a CHILLING EFFECT on the exercise of their FIRST AMENDMENT rights. Chief Justice WARREN E. BURGER'S opinion for the Court, in a 5?4 decision, held that the case lacked RIPENESS because the protesters had presented no "claim of specific present objective ? or ? future harm" but only the fear that "the army may at some future date misuse the information in some way" that would harm them.

MARTIN SHAPIRO

(1986)

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT