In Landmark Communications, Inc. v. Virginia (1977), the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Landmark Communications, which had been convicted by a state court for violating a Virginia statute that made it unlawful to divulge information regarding confidential proceedings before the state's Judicial Inquiry and Review Commission. The case arose after one of Landmark's newspapers published an article about an ongoing investigation by the commission into a judge’s conduct. The Supreme Court held that this conviction violated the First Amendment rights of free speech and press because there was no compelling interest served by punishing truthful publication on matters related to public officials' fitness for office or official misconduct investigations.

In the dissenting opinion for Landmark Communications, Inc. v. Virginia, Justice White argued that the majority's decision failed to adequately consider the state's interest in maintaining confidentiality within its judicial review process. He contended that such a process was essential for preserving public confidence in the judiciary and ensuring effective discipline of judges who violate ethical standards. The First Amendment rights of free speech and press should not be absolute when they threaten these important state interests, he asserted. Furthermore, he believed that punishing those who breach this confidentiality does not necessarily inhibit legitimate criticism or discussion about judicial conduct; rather it prevents unwarranted damage to reputations based on unproven allegations or incomplete information from ongoing investigations.