In the case of Waterman Steamship Corp. v. United States, 1964, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of the government's right to withhold information from a private party if it is deemed necessary for national security reasons. The plaintiff, Waterman Steamship Corporation had sued the federal government for compensation after their ships were requisitioned during World War II under an act that allowed such action but also provided just compensation to owners. When determining fair market value for these vessels, Waterman requested access to certain documents related to ship values which were classified by Navy as confidential and refused on grounds of national security interests. The court held that while due process requires disclosure in most cases involving administrative adjudication or judicial proceedings, there are exceptions when matters involve state secrets where executive privilege can be invoked against revealing military secrets.

In the dissenting opinion for Waterman Steamship Corp. v. United States, Justice Harlan argued that the majority's decision to allow judicial review of executive agreements was a dangerous expansion of judicial power into foreign affairs - an area traditionally reserved for the executive branch. He contended that such decisions should be left to political branches with expertise in international relations and national security matters, rather than courts which lack this specialized knowledge and experience. Furthermore, he expressed concern about potential negative impacts on U.S.'s relationships with other nations if courts were allowed to scrutinize these types of agreements. In his view, it would undermine confidence in U.S.'s ability to honor its commitments if they could be challenged or overturned by domestic courts after being negotiated by the President.