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

AuthorMartin Shapiro

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.



To continue reading

Request your trial