Document: 444 U.S. 507 100 S.Ct. 763 62 L.Ed.2d 704 Frank W. SNEPP, IIIv.UNITED STATES. UNITED STATES v. III. Nos. 78-1871, 79-265. Feb. 19, 1980. Rehearing Denied April 14, See 445 972, 1668. PER CURIAM. 1 In No. Snepp III seeks review of a judgment enforcing an agreement that he signed when accepted employment with the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). He also contends punitive damages are inappropriate remedy for breach his promise to submit all writings about prepublication review. 79-265, United States conditionally cross petitions from refusing find profits attributable Snepp's impressed constructive trust. We grant certiorari in order correct which both parties seek relief. 2 * Based on experiences as CIA agent, published book certain activities South Vietnam. account without submitting it As express condition 1968, however, had executed promising would "not . publish any information or material relating Agency, its intelligence generally, either during after term [his] specific prior approval by Agency." App. Pet. Cert. p. 59a. The was integral part concurrent undertaking disclose classified proper authorization." Id., at 58a.1 Thus, pledged not divulge and clearance. Government brought this suit enforce agreement. It sought declaration breached contract, injunction requiring future review, imposing trust Government's benefit might earn publishing violation fiduciary obligations Agency.2 3 District Court found "willfully, deliberately surreptitiously position [1968] secrecy agreement" 456 F.Supp. 176, 179 (E.D.Va.1978). court misled officials into believing Finally, determined fact publication "caused irreparable harm loss." 180. therefore enjoined breaches imposed profits. 4 Appeals findings agreed valid contract.3 specifically affirmed finding failure manuscript inflicted "irreparable harm" vital our national security. 595 F.2d 926, 935 (CA4 1979). upheld against violations obligation. court, concluded record did support imposition conclusion rested court's perception First Amendment right unclassified concession—for purposes litigation—that divulged no intelligence. 935-936.4 other words, thought obligation extended only preserving confidentiality material. limited recovery nominal possibility if Government—in jury trial could prove tortious conduct. 5 Judge Hoffman, sitting designation, dissented refusal 1968 agreement, wrote, "was ordinary contract; gave life relationship invested CIA." 938. Prepublication clearance protect confidences associated Punitive damages, Hoffman argued, were speculative breach. agree proceeds II 6 involved extremely high degree opening sentence signed, explicitly recognized entering relationship.5 stipulated that—after obligation—he been "assigned various positions trust" granted "frequent access information, including regarding sources methods." F.Supp., 178.6 basis background exposure. violated exposed entrusted risk disclosure. 7 Whether does depend upon whether actually contained information. deny—as general principle—Snepp's Nor contend—at stage contains simply claims that, light special reposed him should have given opportunity determine proposed compromise sources. Neither concessions undercuts claim 8 Both former agent's unreviewed can be detrimental interests even is unclassified. When agent relies own what detrimental, may reveal CIA—with broader understanding expose confidential sources—could identified harmful. addition receiving domestically based controlled sources, obtains services friendly nations7 agents operating foreign countries. continued availability these depends CIA's ability guarantee security them endanger personal safety agents. 9 Undisputed evidence case shows impairs perform statutory duties. Admiral Turner, Director CIA, testified contradiction others like seriously impaired effectiveness American operations. said, "Over last six nine months, we number discontinue work us. more tell us they very nervous continuing strong complaints whom conduct liaison, who questioned continue exchanging us, fear will remain secret. I cannot estimate you how many potential liaison arrangements never germinated because people unwilling enter business us." 179-180.8 10 view record, explicit not—for has irreparably harmed Government. F.2d, 935; 180.9 11 decision denies most appropriate acknowledged wrong. Indeed, practical matter, well leave reliable deterrent similar No one disputes actual such generally unquantifiable. Nominal hollow alternative, deter one. recoverable unusual. Even recovered, bear relation loss unjust gain. 12 pursue left it10 losing bargain enforce. Proof necessary sustain award force some promised protect. suit, before defendant so elects, subject probing discovery Agency's highly affairs. Rarely run risk. letter introduced trial, Colby noted analogous problem criminal cases. Existing law, stated, "requires revelation open confirming additional nature damage precludes prosecution." 68a. secure unacceptable risks, all. 13 A trust, hand, protects unwarranted risks. This natural customary consequence trust.11 deals fairly conforming relief dimensions If secures clearance, liability. publishes contractual obligation, requires disgorge benefits faithlessness. Since swift sure, tailored those place sensitive And since reaches funds breach, saddle exemplary out proportion deprive equitable effective means protecting contribute reverse insofar refused impose profits, remand cases reinstatement full Court. 14 So ordered. 15 Mr. Justice STEVENS, BRENNAN MARSHALL join, dissenting. 16 intended review.1 purpose Fourth Circuit held, give power censor employees' critical speech, but rather ensure classified, nonpublic disclosed permission. 932 (1979); see Marchetti, 466 1309, 1317 1972), cert. denied, 409 1063, 93 553, 34 516. 17 admittedly duty book, Decent Interval, However, conceded material.2 definition, interest contract designed compromised. Nevertheless, today grants unprecedented drastic form over derived sale book. Because authorized applicable law dispose novel issue summarily conditional cross-petition certiorari, respectfully dissent. 18 rule announces supported statute, common law. Although Congress enacted statutes punishing unauthorized dissemination types information,3 seen fit authorize creates today. contracts provide event breach.4 Court's per curiam opinion seems suggest result blend trusts contracts.5 But neither branches supports under circumstances case. 19 Plainly typical situation settlor conveyed legal title assets trustee use designated beneficiaries. Rather, employee possesses arising loyalty employer. One obligations, long absence written "classified" implication misuse information.6 20 duty, aid basic maintain confidentiality, obtain justify majority attempts equate disclose, labeling "fiduciary." nothing approach. 21 Employment agreements often contain covenants ways fully complies covenant compete. Contrary majority's approach case, courts construed broadly duty; nor sweeping remedies them. On contrary, restraint individual's freedom trade, enforceable survive scrutiny "rule reason." That rule, originally laid down seminal Mitchel Reynolds, P. Wms. 181, 24 Eng.Rep. 347 (1711), reasonably legitimate employer (such confidentiality), employer's outweighed public interest,7 longer duration wider geographical scope than interest.8 22 persuaded me reason analysis applied Like employer, information; same time, countervailing wide range opportunities (including author) rights. lies accommodation preserve mission while abridging free flow harsh restriction employee's freedom,9 despite admission protect—the information—has compromised, equity enforced.10 23 assuming enforced, remedy. used profit, obviously direct book; sense product For, submitted censorship authority surely excision then, obliged clear precisely now stands.11 gained breach; Government, Snepp, unjustly enriched required entirely activity. Despite caused type ordinarily remedied ground suffered harm. states "unreviewed material" "can unclassified." Ante, 511-512. then injury stems inability catch "harmful" published. do believe, "detrimental interests" otherwise "identified harmful." Ibid. attempted assert signed; rather, itself preventing disclosure Moreover, wide-ranging good policy, great difficulty reconciling demands Amendment. 25 extent theory flouting thus making appear powerless prevent chose publish, not. theorized appearance weakness discourage governments cooperating their secrets impact, testimony Stansfield stating jeopardized unsure confidentiality. Turner's truncated explain, unidentified "other" books information.12 so, difficult believe Snepp's, significantly weakened position. explain agencies stopped done revealed merely disagree classification policies.13 26 event, punish generalized failing following footsteps, is, clearly preferable "since concept enrichment deterrence punishment. D. Dobbs, Law Remedies § 3.9 205 4.3 246 (1973)." 937.14 27 just disposition merits. 28 filed petition challenging Circuit's entry manuscripts remanded determination Interval publication. brief opposition certiorari; cross-petitioning bring entire decide petition. explained "[b]ecause provided appeals appears sufficient interest, government independently Court." concluding paragraph stated: "if [Snepp's] writ cross-petition. 78-1871 denied." 5. 29 Given position, inappropriate, perhaps beyond jurisdiction, denying Snepp's. Yet essence done.15 merit consideration, dismissed footnote. 509, n. 3. 30 demonstration why reach question necessarily presented it, stated "sufficient" interests, forges ahead rejects grounds (a) too "reliable security," ante, 514, (b) require forego make disclosures, "no all," 515. foreclosed relying acquiescence second rationale16 and, least, almost certainly 31 "[p]roof protect." 514. 32 Appeals' entitled proving deceived going comply relied misrepresentations detriment. fail showing "probing affairs." 33 uninhibited character today's exercise lawmaking highlighted disregard two venerable principles favor conservative First, centuries English-speaking judiciary unless plaintiff show inadequate. Without waiting appraise adequacy jumped necessary. 35 Second, greater importance, unaware new fashioned species citizen's criticize government.17 Inherent reviewing agency delay persuade author modify contents secrecy. speech imposes especially heavy burden seeks. take met. 36 Upon eve departure 1976, "termination agreement." document reaffirmed "never" "any concerning made consent representative." 61a. At time already received $60,000 advance payments. His publisher provides royalties rejected each defenses enforcement contract. 931-934 1979); 180-181. primarily unenforceable protected speech. voluntarily expressly obligated duress. Agency. "entirely appropriate" Director's mandate "protec[t] methods disclosure," 50 U.S.C. 403(d)(3). 932. that—even agreement—the acted substantial reasonable restrictions contexts CSC Letter Carriers, 413 548, 565, 2880, 2890, 37 796 (1973); Brown Glines, 348, 594, 540 (1980); Buckley Valeo, 424 1, 25-28, 96 612, 637-639, 46 659 (1976); Greer Spock, 828, 1211, 47 505 id., 844-848, S.Ct., 1220-1222 (POWELL, J., concurring); Cole Richardson, 405 676, 92 1332, 593 (1972). compelling important essential operation service. infra, interest. concession distinguished litigation 1309 (CA4), 516 There, claimed violate 1313. Marchetti consider By litigation, overlooked difference between Marchetti. first read: "I, III, understand am ." 58a. Quite apart plain language duties materials establish relationship. 939 (Hoffman, concurring dissenting part). Few governmental involve higher Every major nation world Whatever said past activities, (or predecessor Office Strategic Services) every President Franklin Roosevelt and—in sense—the world. impossible wisely decisions policy defense dependable T. Powers, Man Who Kept Secrets (1979). questioning testimony, STEVENS' suggests concern occasioned hazards allowing whatever pleases, release disagreement policy. Post, 522-523. views respect reflect misapprehension reflected testimony. domain, concerned. advance, procedures, procedure, responsible official assured privy conclude own—innocently dissent argues "censor" publications. 522. procedure judicial compliance material, presumably—if accepts present assertion intentions—an effort eliminate harmful disclosures. Absent respect, borne seeking Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. Colby, 509 1362 421 992, 95 1999, 44 482 (1975); otherwise, STEVENS says "the compromised." 561-517. premise wholly odds bifurcates treats interdependent provisions unrelated obligations. analogizes private compete 518-520. body competition, bearing conformity disclosure." Hoffman's unavailable must State allows proof compensatory damages. F.2d., 940. majority, held matter federal award. 936, 10, 937-938. concedes obtained course employment. 518. exploitation 521. think treat "confidential" "classified." See, e. g., post, common-law considerably expansive. Restatement (Second) §§ 396(c), 400 Comment c, 404 Comments b, d (1958); Scott, Trusts (3d ed. 1967). involves republication need look termination 1976 substantially commitment. response interrogatory asking contended "Decent CIA," "[f]or action, contend." Record Item 24, 14. concession, sustained objections efforts considers classified. Tr. 135; Herbert Hetu, Public Affairs, 153. 798, prison years $10,000 fine knowingly willfully 794, makes offense punishable communicate government; 8312, withdraws retirement person convicted violating statutes. Exec.Order 12065, CFR 190 (1979), note 401 (1976 ed., Supp. II), administrative sanctions, discharge, employees remedy, hardly free, suggests, "to pleases." 513, 8. original penalties attach cause mentioned footnote, 515, 11, holding But, inasmuch state source constitutes Sperry Rand Corp. A-T-O, Inc., 447 1387, 1392 1971) (Virginia law), 1017, 1292, 479; Tlapek Chevron Oil Co., 407 1129 (CA8 1969) (Arkansas law); Structural Dynamics Research Engineering Mechanics Corp., 1102, 1120 (E.D.Mich.1975) (Michigan 396(c) (1958) ("Unless agreed, agency, agent: (c) trade competition principal ."). Morris, Ltd. Saxelby, [1916] A.C. 688, 704, outweigh keeping force: "[A]n can[not] using skill knowledge profession learnt directions instructions himself gain advantage having admirable instruction. interferes protection where made, man acquired, else. Briggs R. Donnelley & Sons 589 39, 41 (CA1 1978)(Illinois Hot Rod Assn., Carrier, 500 1269, 1277 1974) (North Carolina Alston Studios, Lloyd V. Gress Associates, 492 279, 282 Mixing Equipment Co. Philadelphia Gear, 436 1308, 1312 (CA3 (New York Water Services, Tesco Chemicals, 410 163, 167 (CA5 (Georgia Contracts 330 (Tent. Draft 12, Mar. 1977). serious speak freely, 17, indefinite scope—factors unenforceable. supra, 283 (holding void Virginia limitation); 1279 North durational E. L. Conwell Gutberlet, 429 527, 528 1970) Maryland limitation). correctly points regulate contexts. none cites requirement statements prerelease approval. previously considered enforceability kind considering noteworthy reiterated reference footnote so-called confidentiality," 3, ambiguity "detrimental" opposed 511-512, imply questions identity works Turner referred. 136. testify "[p]rimarily media identification collecting 143. maintained Interval. December 7, 1977, interview Tomorrow show, "I methods. Requests Admissions, Exhibit I, attorneys particular States' authorities 138. unclear reacted unfavorably William Director, indicate nations stricter code States. 175-176. justifications "it gain." solicitude welfare ironic Draconian unable discover previous today, reaching merits belief granting certiorari. Which, noted, anywhere 5-page mere text search bound inhibiting effect author's writing. until completed tolerated New Times States, 403 713, 91 2140, 822; Nebraska Press Assn. Stuart, 427 539, 2791, 49 683. maintaining service, prepared say intolerable context. am, granted, resolved briefing argument.

Category: 2