Protecting Sources
-
Upload
dan-kennedy -
Category
Education
-
view
2.580 -
download
1
description
Transcript of Protecting Sources
![Page 1: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Protecting sources
A constitutional clash — withthe media on the losing end
![Page 2: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
An old dilemma
• In 1848, John Nugent of the New York Herald was held for refusing to identify a source to the Senate
![Page 3: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
An old dilemma
• In 1848, John Nugent of the New York Herald was held for refusing to identify a source to the Senate
• The Herald gave Nugent a raise
![Page 4: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
An old dilemma
• In 1848, John Nugent of the New York Herald was held for refusing to identify a source to the Senate
• The Herald gave Nugent a raise• After a month, the Senate gave up
![Page 5: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Another clash over the Sixth
• “[T]he accused shall enjoy the right … to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor”
![Page 6: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Another clash over the Sixth
• “[T]he accused shall enjoy the right … to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor”
• All must testify before the grand jury
![Page 7: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Another clash over the Sixth
• “[T]he accused shall enjoy the right … to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor”
• All must testify before the grand jury• The First Amendment belongs to everyone,
not just the press
![Page 8: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Journalist’s orreporter’s privilege
• As with free press/fair trial, a balancing test
![Page 9: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Journalist’s orreporter’s privilege
• As with free press/fair trial, a balancing test• Courts decide on a case-by-case basis
![Page 10: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Journalist’s orreporter’s privilege
• As with free press/fair trial, a balancing test• Courts decide on a case-by-case basis• Guidelines have shifted over time
![Page 11: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Branzburg v. Hayes (1972)
• Paul Branzburg’s sources had information about drugs
• Two co-defendants had done confidential reporting on the Black Panther Party
![Page 12: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Byron “Whizzer” White
• Wrote majority opinion
• Rejected reporter’s privilege
• Wrote that “the lonely pamphleteer” is as important as professional journalists
![Page 13: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Potter Stewart
• Wrote minority decision• Criticized majority’s
“disturbing insensitivity” to the role of a free press
• Proposed a three-part balancing test
![Page 14: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
The Stewart test
• Does the journalist possess “clearly relevant” information?
![Page 15: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
The Stewart test
• Does the journalist possess “clearly relevant” information?
• Is there no way of obtaining the information by “less destructive” means?
![Page 16: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
The Stewart test
• Does the journalist possess “clearly relevant” information?
• Is there no way of obtaining the information by “less destructive” means?
• Is there a “compelling and overriding need” for the information?
![Page 17: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Powell’s “enigmaticconcurring opinion”
• Sides with majority’s view that there is no reporter’s privilege
• Calls for “striking of a proper balance” between freedom of the press the obligation to testify
• Stewart wins by losing (but not forever)
![Page 18: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
The balancing test in practice
• Relevance and importance of information
![Page 19: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
The balancing test in practice
• Relevance and importance of information• Availability through alternative means
![Page 20: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
The balancing test in practice
• Relevance and importance of information• Availability through alternative means• Type of controversy
– Reporter’s privilege is weaker in a criminal case than a civil case
![Page 21: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
The balancing test in practice
• Relevance and importance of information• Availability through alternative means• Type of controversy• How information was gathered
– Confidential sources are more privileged than first-hand observation such as Josh Wolf’s footage
![Page 22: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Shield laws
• About 30 states have them– A shield law is being considered in
Massachusetts
![Page 23: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Shield laws
• About 30 states have them• Except for Wyoming, remaining states have
judicial opinions granting some degree of journalistic privilege
![Page 24: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Shield laws
• About 30 states have them• Except for Wyoming, remaining states have
judicial opinions granting some degree of journalistic privilege
• None is absolute — more like the Stewart balancing test
![Page 25: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Shield laws
• About 30 states have them• Except for Wyoming, remaining states have
judicial opinions granting some degree of journalistic privilege
• None is absolute — more like the Stewart balancing test
• No federal shield law
![Page 26: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
What should be protected?
• Justice White said you can’t define who is a journalist
• Vanessa Leggett ran afoul of this and served 168 days
• Is it possible to define journalism?
![Page 27: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Citizen journalists
• Josh Wolf is the modern “lonely pamphleteer”
• We need to protect journalism, and not worry about who’s a journalist
![Page 28: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Media arrogance• Mark Bowden asks:
Why should the media stand in the way of justice?
• “The First Amendment protects freedom of the press, but it doesn’t absolve it from all civic responsibility”
![Page 29: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Cohen v. CowlesMedia Co. (1991)
• Damned if you do, damned if you don’t
![Page 30: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Cohen v. CowlesMedia Co. (1991)
• Damned if you do, damned if you don’t• Based on the doctrine of promissory estoppel
– A false promise that leads someone to engage in damaging behavior
– Similar to contract law
![Page 31: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Cohen v. CowlesMedia Co. (1991)
• Damned if you do, damned if you don’t• Based on the doctrine of promissory estoppel
– A false promise that leads someone to engage in damaging behavior
– Similar to contract law• Justice White: “generally applicable laws” do
not violate First Amendment
![Page 32: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
McKevitt v. Pallasch (2003)
• Richard Posner a highly influential conservative judge
• Can’t ignore Supreme Court precedent
• Tells colleagues to re-read Branzburg and see it for what it is
![Page 33: Protecting Sources](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022061217/54b41d564a79597c4f8b45b2/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Judith Miller case (2005)
• Judge Sentelle adopts Posner’s view
• Notes that Justice Powell sided with the Branzburg majority
• Adds that Justice Department used balancing test