In the United States v. Weber Aircraft Corp. case of 1983, the Supreme Court ruled on whether certain documents containing information about a military aircraft crash could be withheld from disclosure under Exemption 5 of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The exemption allows for inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters to be exempted if they would not be available by law to a party in litigation with the agency. The court held that witness statements taken during an Air Force investigation into an aircraft accident were privileged and thus exempt from FOIA requests because they were part of an internal government deliberative process. Furthermore, it was determined that summaries prepared by safety investigators based on interviews conducted during their inquiry also fell within this privilege as these reports are used in policy-making decisions and revealing them could hinder open and frank discussion among those who make such decisions.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. Weber Aircraft Corp., Justice Brennan, joined by Justices Marshall and Blackmun, argued that the majority's decision to uphold a broad interpretation of "state secrets privilege" was misguided. They contended that such an expansive view could potentially shield any evidence from discovery if it had been classified as secret by a department head in the executive branch. The dissenters believed this would undermine fair adjudication and compromise justice because it allows government officials to unilaterally decide what information is privileged without judicial review or oversight. Furthermore, they expressed concern about how this ruling might affect future cases involving military contractors who may be held accountable for their negligence or misconduct but are protected under state secrets privilege.