His successor as reporter, Richard Peters, in addition to publishing the current volumes of reports, had gone over his predecessor's work, eliminated the arguments of counsel and other material beyond the opinions themselves, and published an abridged edition reducing twenty-four volumes into six.

Justice John McLean, who had publishing experience as the founder of an Ohio newspaper, wrote the opinion of the Court.

It ruled that while the common law protected copyright in unpublished writings (such as diaries or personal letters), "this is a very different right from that which asserts a perpetual and exclusive property in the future publication of the work, after the author shall have published it to the world.

That precedent corresponded to the English decision in Donaldson v Beckett, which was cited in the Court's opinion.

Justice Smith Thompson wrote a dissenting opinion in which he concluded that Wheaton was entitled to an injunction against Peters' publication of his reports.

The decision was upheld and expanded to all judicial opinions in Banks v. Manchester although Callaghan v. Myers established that editorial additions to the materials could be restricted by copyright.