169:
obtain approval from the attorney general, the extent of the authorized punishment is “an administrative reprimand or other appropriate disciplinary action.” In fact, some courts have found that the guidelines “create no enforceable right.” Therefore, in circuits taking this approach, the news media have no right to appeal for enforcement of these policies before being compelled to testify.
411:
In re: Miller, 397 F.3d 964, 975 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (The appellant journalists claimed that the contempt charges should be reversed because the justice department had not complied with the guidelines issuing subpoenas to news media. Because the circuit court found that the guidelines did not create an
163:
Subpoenas should, wherever possible, be directed at material information regarding a limited subject matter, should cover a reasonably limited period of time, and should avoid requiring production of a large volume of unpublished material. They should give reasonable and timely notice of the demand
212:
refused to hear the case. Judith Miller began serving the remaining four months of the original eighteen-month sentence on July 6, 2005. Matthew Cooper’s confidential source released him from their confidentiality agreement, so he chose to comply with the subpoena and has agreed to testify before
145:
In criminal cases, there should be reasonable grounds to believe, based on information obtained from non-media sources, that a crime has occurred, and that the information sought is essential to a successful investigation—particularly with reference to directly establishing guilt or innocence. The
204:
Miller and Cooper, in their appeal to the appellate court pleaded several defenses including a First
Amendment reporter’s privilege and a common law reporter’s privilege. The appellate court rejected both the First Amendment and common law claims for privilege. The court held Miller and Cooper in
149:
In civil cases there should be reasonable grounds, based on non-media sources, to believe that the information sought is essential to the successful completion of the litigation in a case of substantial importance. The subpoena should not be used to obtain peripheral, nonessential, or speculative
168:
While these guidelines seem extremely protective of the press, they explicitly deny the creation of “any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law.” Nor does the policy have any substantive punishment for the federal government violations. If the federal prosecutors fail to
266:(R-NV) introduced S.4004 to amend section 798 of title 18, United States Code, to provide penalties for disclosure of classified information related to certain intelligence activities and for other purposes. While titled the SHIELD Act, the proposed legislation has little in common with
520:
513:
156:
The use of subpoenas to members of the news media should, except under exigent circumstances, be limited to the verification of published information and to such surrounding circumstances as relate to the accuracy of the published
133:
by regulating the use of subpoenas against the press. These guidelines state that the government "should have made all reasonable attempts to obtain the information from alternative, non-media sources” before considering issuing a
506:
198:
85:
189:. Miller and Cooper were both served with grand jury subpoenas for testimony and information, including notes and documents pertaining to conversations with specific and all other official sources relating the
456:
H.R. 581 (Free Flow of
Information Act of 2005). This bill was referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. See also S. 340 (Free Flow of Information Act of 2005) (referred to the Senate Committee on the
41:), is a "reporter's protection under constitutional or statutory law, from being compelled to testify about confidential information or sources." It may be described in the US as the qualified (limited)
141:
Before any subpoena may be issued, the attorney general must approve the issuance. The attorney general’s review for a subpoena to a member of the news media shall be based on the following criteria:
799:
81:
831:
95:
69:
57:
823:
430:
Id. at 967. Miller and Cooper also put forward a due process defense and a defense based on guidelines for the
Justice Department that are codified at 28 C.F.R. § 50.10 (2005).
77:
73:
65:
61:
53:
543:
42:
855:
138:
to a member of the news media. Furthermore, the guidelines require that federal prosecutors negotiate with the press, explaining the specific needs of the case.
738:
945:
638:
532:
916:
908:
205:
civil contempt of court and sentenced both to eighteen months of jail time. The sentence was stayed pending an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
222:
953:
193:. Both refused to submit to the subpoenas, claiming a reporter’s privilege. The federal district court held both Miller and Cooper in civil
349:
259:
186:
622:
126:
936:
529:
209:
994:
875:
666:
630:
160:
Even subpoena authorization requests for publicly disclosed information should be treated with care to avoid claims of harassment.
884:
303:
267:
863:
557:
466:
S. 369. Sen. Dodd introduced the same bill in the 2004 congressional session. It was not acted on before the Senate adjourned.
746:
984:
791:
783:
714:
683:
229:
to create a federal shield law. The first bill was introduced in identical form in both the Senate and the House by
Senator
989:
766:
606:
286:
847:
807:
892:
252:
182:
16:
This article is about source protection in the United States. For the article on source protection worldwide, see
900:
754:
598:
582:
153:
The government should have unsuccessfully attempted to obtain the information from alternative non-media sources.
691:
244:(D-CT) introduced separate legislation that created a seemingly broader protection than the Pence/Lugar bill.
45:
or statutory right many jurisdictions have given to journalists in protecting their confidential sources from
815:
775:
730:
498:
316:
566:
109:
309:
298:
238:
226:
999:
924:
614:
961:
722:
675:
646:
357:
280:
100:
490:
839:
574:
194:
17:
177:
The issue of a reporter's privilege came to the forefront of media attention in the 2005 case
248:
241:
90:
146:
subpoena should not be used to obtain peripheral, nonessential, or speculative information.
104:. Furthermore, forty-nine states and the District of Columbia have enacted statutes called
654:
590:
552:
46:
371:
88:
Circuits have all held that a qualified reporter's privilege exists. In the 2013 case of
978:
478:
230:
27:
292:
190:
263:
234:
130:
105:
412:
enforceable right, it found no reason to determine the issue of compliance).
135:
199:
United States Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
502:
444:
441:
New York Times
Reporter Jailed for Keeping Source Secret
129:
created self-imposed guidelines intended to protect the
800:
Greenbelt
Cooperative Publishing Ass'n, Inc. v. Bresler
832:
Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. v. Greenmoss
Builders, Inc.
221:
In 2004, two significant bills were introduced in the
173:
Judith Miller's attempted use of reporter's privilege
172:
98:
expressly denied a reporter's privilege exists under
824:
Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union of United States, Inc.
421:
In re Miller, 397 F.3d 964, 966-68 (D.C. Cir. 2005).
935:
874:
765:
702:
665:
551:
479:http://www.rcfp.org/news/2005/0217-con-second.html
544:First Amendment to the United States Constitution
339:, West Publishing-Thomson Reuters (9th ed. 2009).
121:Department of Justice guidelines (United States)
856:Harte-Hanks Communications, Inc. v. Connaughton
372:"Is It Finally Time for a Federal Shield Law?"
514:
8:
739:Minneapolis Star Tribune Co. v. Commissioner
475:Second shield bill introduced in U.S. Senate
946:Zacchini v. Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co.
470:S. 3020, 108th Congress, 2nd Sess. (2004);
917:Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. v. FCC II
521:
507:
499:
258:On December 2, 2010, in a reaction to the
909:Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. v. FCC I
639:Landmark Communications, Inc. v. Virginia
329:
954:Harper & Row v. Nation Enterprises
255:on the topic of reporter's privilege.
223:United States House of Representatives
7:
747:Arkansas Writers' Project v. Ragland
260:United States diplomatic cables leak
623:New York Times Co. v. United States
127:United States Department of Justice
14:
885:Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC
304:Shield laws in the United States
268:shield laws in the United States
864:Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co.
201:upheld the orders of contempt.
792:Curtis Publishing Co. v. Butts
784:New York Times Co. v. Sullivan
715:Grosjean v. American Press Co.
684:Cox Broadcasting Corp. v. Cohn
631:Nebraska Press Ass'n v. Stuart
439:Adam Liptak and Maria Newman,
1:
384:28 C.F.R. § 50.10(c)(4)(iii).
607:Lamont v. Postmaster General
287:Free Flow of Information Act
901:FCC v. WNCN Listeners Guild
848:Hustler Magazine v. Falwell
808:Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.
533:Freedom of the Press Clause
1016:
893:FCC v. Pacifica Foundation
253:Senate Judiciary Committee
233:(R-IN) and Representative
15:
755:Cohen v. Cowles Media Co.
599:Hannegan v. Esquire, Inc.
583:Lovell v. City of Griffin
540:
995:Privileged communication
692:Florida Star v. B. J. F.
108:protecting journalists'
816:Time, Inc. v. Firestone
776:Beauharnais v. Illinois
217:Congressional proposals
32:journalist's privilege,
731:Houchins v. KQED, Inc.
337:Black's Law Dictionary
317:Von Bulow v. Von Bulow
181:, involving reporters
985:Freedom of expression
937:Copyrighted materials
567:Patterson v. Colorado
402:28 C.F.R. § 50.10(i).
393:28 C.F.R. § 50.10(j).
251:testified before the
990:Sources (journalism)
310:Subpoena duces tecum
299:Privilege (evidence)
227:United States Senate
35:newsman's privilege,
24:Reporter's privilege
925:Bartnicki v. Vopper
615:Sheppard v. Maxwell
962:Eldred v. Ashcroft
723:Branzburg v. Hayes
676:Time, Inc. v. Hill
530:U.S. Supreme Court
445:The New York Times
281:Branzburg v. Hayes
210:U.S. Supreme Court
972:
971:
840:McDonald v. Smith
575:Near v. Minnesota
195:contempt of court
110:anonymous sources
18:Source protection
1007:
553:Prior restraints
523:
516:
509:
500:
493:
488:
482:
464:
458:
454:
448:
437:
431:
428:
422:
419:
413:
409:
403:
400:
394:
391:
385:
382:
376:
375:
368:
362:
361:
356:. Archived from
346:
340:
334:
249:Rodney A. Smolla
242:Christopher Dodd
213:the grand jury.
91:U.S. v. Sterling
1015:
1014:
1010:
1009:
1008:
1006:
1005:
1004:
975:
974:
973:
968:
931:
876:Broadcast media
870:
761:
704:
698:
661:
655:Tory v. Cochran
591:Tucker v. Texas
555:
547:
536:
527:
497:
496:
489:
485:
465:
461:
455:
451:
447:, July 6, 2005.
438:
434:
429:
425:
420:
416:
410:
406:
401:
397:
392:
388:
383:
379:
374:. 26 July 2018.
370:
369:
365:
354:lexmedia.com.au
348:
347:
343:
335:
331:
326:
276:
219:
175:
123:
118:
43:First Amendment
39:press privilege
21:
12:
11:
5:
1013:
1011:
1003:
1002:
997:
992:
987:
977:
976:
970:
969:
967:
966:
958:
950:
941:
939:
933:
932:
930:
929:
921:
913:
905:
897:
889:
880:
878:
872:
871:
869:
868:
860:
852:
844:
836:
828:
820:
812:
804:
796:
788:
780:
771:
769:
763:
762:
760:
759:
751:
743:
735:
727:
719:
710:
708:
700:
699:
697:
696:
688:
680:
671:
669:
663:
662:
660:
659:
651:
643:
635:
627:
619:
611:
603:
595:
587:
579:
571:
562:
560:
549:
548:
541:
538:
537:
528:
526:
525:
518:
511:
503:
495:
494:
483:
459:
449:
432:
423:
414:
404:
395:
386:
377:
363:
360:on 2015-09-07.
341:
328:
327:
325:
322:
321:
320:
313:
306:
301:
296:
289:
284:
275:
272:
218:
215:
187:Matthew Cooper
174:
171:
166:
165:
164:for documents.
161:
158:
154:
151:
147:
122:
119:
117:
114:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1012:
1001:
998:
996:
993:
991:
988:
986:
983:
982:
980:
964:
963:
959:
956:
955:
951:
948:
947:
943:
942:
940:
938:
934:
927:
926:
922:
919:
918:
914:
911:
910:
906:
903:
902:
898:
895:
894:
890:
887:
886:
882:
881:
879:
877:
873:
866:
865:
861:
858:
857:
853:
850:
849:
845:
842:
841:
837:
834:
833:
829:
826:
825:
821:
818:
817:
813:
810:
809:
805:
802:
801:
797:
794:
793:
789:
786:
785:
781:
778:
777:
773:
772:
770:
768:
764:
757:
756:
752:
749:
748:
744:
741:
740:
736:
733:
732:
728:
725:
724:
720:
717:
716:
712:
711:
709:
707:
701:
694:
693:
689:
686:
685:
681:
678:
677:
673:
672:
670:
668:
664:
657:
656:
652:
649:
648:
644:
641:
640:
636:
633:
632:
628:
625:
624:
620:
617:
616:
612:
609:
608:
604:
601:
600:
596:
593:
592:
588:
585:
584:
580:
577:
576:
572:
569:
568:
564:
563:
561:
559:
554:
550:
546:
545:
539:
534:
531:
524:
519:
517:
512:
510:
505:
504:
501:
492:
487:
484:
480:
476:
473:
469:
463:
460:
453:
450:
446:
442:
436:
433:
427:
424:
418:
415:
408:
405:
399:
396:
390:
387:
381:
378:
373:
367:
364:
359:
355:
351:
345:
342:
338:
333:
330:
323:
319:
318:
314:
312:
311:
307:
305:
302:
300:
297:
295:
294:
290:
288:
285:
283:
282:
278:
277:
273:
271:
269:
265:
261:
256:
254:
250:
245:
243:
240:
236:
232:
231:Richard Lugar
228:
224:
216:
214:
211:
208:However, the
206:
202:
200:
196:
192:
188:
184:
183:Judith Miller
180:
170:
162:
159:
155:
152:
148:
144:
143:
142:
139:
137:
132:
128:
120:
116:United States
115:
113:
111:
107:
103:
102:
97:
93:
92:
87:
83:
79:
75:
71:
67:
63:
59:
55:
50:
48:
44:
40:
36:
33:
29:
28:United States
25:
19:
960:
952:
944:
923:
915:
907:
899:
891:
883:
862:
854:
846:
838:
830:
822:
814:
806:
798:
790:
782:
774:
753:
745:
737:
729:
721:
713:
705:
703:Taxation and
690:
682:
674:
653:
645:
637:
629:
621:
613:
605:
597:
589:
581:
573:
565:
542:
491:S. 4004
486:
474:
471:
467:
462:
452:
440:
435:
426:
417:
407:
398:
389:
380:
366:
358:the original
353:
344:
336:
332:
315:
308:
293:In re Madden
291:
279:
257:
246:
220:
207:
203:
191:Plame affair
179:In re Miller
178:
176:
167:
157:information.
150:information.
140:
124:
99:
89:
51:
38:
34:
31:
23:
22:
647:Lowe v. SEC
457:Judiciary).
264:John Ensign
225:and in the
106:shield laws
1000:Journalism
979:Categories
767:Defamation
706:privileges
558:censorship
350:"LexMedia"
324:References
235:Mike Pence
197:, and the
131:news media
247:In 2006,
101:Branzburg
47:discovery
535:case law
472:see also
274:See also
237:(R-IN).
136:subpoena
82:Eleventh
667:Privacy
239:Senator
26:in the
965:(2003)
957:(1985)
949:(1977)
928:(2001)
920:(1997)
912:(1994)
904:(1981)
896:(1978)
888:(1969)
867:(1990)
859:(1989)
851:(1988)
843:(1985)
835:(1985)
827:(1984)
819:(1976)
811:(1974)
803:(1970)
795:(1967)
787:(1964)
779:(1952)
758:(1991)
750:(1987)
742:(1983)
734:(1978)
726:(1972)
718:(1936)
695:(1989)
687:(1975)
679:(1967)
658:(2005)
650:(1985)
642:(1978)
634:(1976)
626:(1971)
618:(1966)
610:(1965)
602:(1946)
594:(1946)
586:(1938)
578:(1931)
570:(1907)
96:Fourth
94:, the
84:, and
70:Eighth
58:Second
30:(also
78:Tenth
74:Ninth
66:Fifth
62:Third
54:First
556:and
185:and
125:The
86:D.C.
52:The
468:See
49:.
37:or
981::
477:,
443:,
352:.
270:.
262:,
112:.
80:,
76:,
72:,
68:,
64:,
60:,
56:,
522:e
515:t
508:v
481:.
20:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.