Senate Considers Media Shield
 |
James Joyner | Wednesday, July 20, 2005 |
Senate Considers Media Shield (AP – WaPo)
The Senate Judiciary Committee, before turning to President Bush’s Supreme Court nominee, is hearing what the administration thinks about jailing reporters who refuse to reveal their sources. The testimony from Deputy Attorney General James Comey comes as the panel considers a bill that would protect reporters from being imprisoned by federal courts.
Two weeks ago, a federal judge sent New York Times reporter Judith Miller to jail for refusing to divulge who told her Valerie Plame was a CIA officer. Miller never actually wrote a story about Plame. Pointing to broader implications, the special prosecutor in the Plame case, Patrick Fitzgerald, said earlier this month that “we can’t have 50,000 journalists” making their own decisions about whether to reveal sources.
The bill, sponsored by Sen. Richard Lugar and Rep. Mike Pence, both Indiana Republicans, would stop short of giving reporters absolute immunity. In response to a request from the Justice Department, the sponsors added an exception for cases where source identification is essential for protecting national security. “It simply gives journalists certain rights and abilities to seek sources and report appropriate information without fear of intimidation or imprisonment, much as, in the public interest, we allow psychiatrists, clergy and social workers to maintain confidences,” Pence said in prepared testimony.
[...]
It’s the federal court’s power that the Senate panel wants to examine. Thirty-one states and the District of Columbia have such “shield” laws, but there is no set of standards that applies in federal courts.
This would have little practical effect, as the bill’s provisions sound very close to existing Justice Department policy. Still, formalizing this issue into law makes sense. Of course, most applications of the shield law will naturally be at the state and local level, where this law would not apply.
About the Author: James Joyner is the publisher of Outside the Beltway and the managing editor of the Atlantic Council. He's a former Army officer, Desert Storm vet, and college professor with a PhD in political science from The University of Alabama. He lives just outside the Beltway in Alexandria, Virginia with his wife and infant daughter.
Follow James on FriendFeed | Twitter | Digg
- None Found
- Nathalie Blanchard Facebook Smile Leaves Her Depressed
- Glenn Beck, Community Organizer
- OTB Latenight – Cherry Poppin’ Daddies
- Hacked Climate Scientists Emails Reveal Truth
- Obama, the Recession, and Polls
- Giuliani Running for Senate, Not Governor
- OTB Latenight – The Jesus & Mary Chain
- Fox Fake Crowd Videos
- Congress to Investigate Fake Districts
- Douthat Blogging Again
These premadona reporters need to be jailed. They consistently put themselves above the law and don't care a bit about the damage they do to America. All under "Free Speech" LOL
Senator Lugar should be ashamed of himself, but he is and has been suffering from "Retirementitus"
In fact, Lugar is still working on alcohol as an alternative fuel, not knowing is cost more than gasoline.
Some reporters need to be jailed permanently
It's the federal court's power that the Senate panel wants to examine. Thirty-one states and the District of Columbia have such "shield" laws, but there is no set of standards that applies in federal courts.
Which is wrong. The standard is Brandenburg and is basically the same standard used in most state shield laws. As well, the shield for journalists is different than psychiatrists, clergy and social workers, who are holding the confidence of the client in a way that provides benefit to the client but no external benefit to the professional. Not so with the journalist, who is actually using the confidentiality to sell news product.
And I'm almost certain you could get a five justice majority to shoot down this law pretty fast. I'd be interested in seeing it taken that far.
Comments are Closed
