About Michael Troy Expertise I will answer general questions regarding freedom of speech, petition, or religion. I specialize in cases involving public employment or education, as well as issues related to campaign finance. But I can`t give specific legal advice involving specific cases you might have.
Experience As an attorney for the Center for Individual Rights, I worked on a number of free speech cases, including Rosenberger v. Univ. of Virginia, in which the Supreme Court upheld my clients' right to run a student newspaper without discrimination because of its religious conent. I also worked on White v. Julian, which protected the right of people to protest against a homeless shelter in their neighborhood.
I also worked for the Federal Election Commission on several cases regarding the right to participate in the election process.
Organizations Former Attorney for Center for Individual Rights.
Publications Washington Post
Washington Times
Education/Credentials J.D. from Univ. of Michigan Law School
Question Hi, I'm doing a project for school on the pentagon papers and hope that you could answer a couple questions.
1. Do you think the Pentagon Papers should have been public from the start?
2. Do you think Robert Mcnamara should have kept a better eye on the papers progress instead of expelling himself from the project in the beginning?
3. How important would you say the Pentagon Papers were to the public opinions of the right to know and national security?
Thank you so much for your opinions and time, I look forward to your answer :).
Answer The "Pentagon Papers" were basically a historical review of US involvement in Vietnam. There may have been a few minor details that should have been kept from the public but by and large, there was nothing in there that threatened national security by its publication.
Secretaries commission reports and studies all the time. It is not expected that they oversee every detail involved in drafting the report. Indeed it would be highly unusual for them to do so, and could bias the outcome of the report. Therefore, a hands off approach was probably most appropriate.
I think the court cases that resulted helped to focus the fact that government frequently classified materials not out of any real national security purpose but to avoid having to release potentially embarrassing information to the public. This greatly increased public support for more government openness.
