Home > The Secrecy File > Archives > 2007 > October > 08 > Entry
Reporter shield law: making sense of supreme court rule
The palpable tension between a journalist’s desire to protect confidential sources and the Justice Department’s authority to demand their identity is examined in a story by the New York Times today.
Reporter Adam Liptak, takes a look at the controversial 1972 Supreme Court decision that said reporters are not protected by the First Amendment against grand jury subpoenas.
Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr., who joined the majority in the 5-4 decision, wrote a separate opinion at the time calling on judges to strike the “proper balance between freedom of the press and the obligation of all citizens to give relevant testimony.”
Media lawyers have used those words to successfully convince lower courts that Powell meant that the media should not be forced to divulge sources.
Over the last four years, a growing number of reporters have been ordered to turn over their notes or divulge their sources in federal court. That has prompted the media industry to fight back with an unprecedented lobbying blitz.
It looks like a bill to give reporters a qualified privilege to protect their sources is gaining bipartisan momentum. The Senate Judiciary Committee overwhelmingly supported a bill from Sens. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., and Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., to the floor with a 15-2 vote last week.
The bill would give reporters limited protection from disclosing their sources and notes in most cases.
Permalink | |
