Miami Herald | EDITORIAL

The right to know

 

OUR OPINION: Need for federal shield law to protect journalists and sources becomes more urgent

 
MCT
MCT
Campanario / MCT

HeraldEd@MiamiHerald.com

A decision by the U.S. Supreme Court last week to blithely ignore the First Amendment rights of journalists and their essential need to protect confidential sources makes it more necessary than ever for Congress to enact a federal shield law.

The action involves a confrontation between the media and the Obama administration in the case of James Risen, a New York Times reporter facing jail for refusing to identify a confidential source.

The Risen case began when the Justice Department issued a subpoena seeking information about his source for a chapter of his 2006 book, State of War. The Obama administration, which has pursued leaks aggressively, filed briefs contending that “reporters have no privilege to refuse to provide direct evidence of criminal wrongdoing by confidential sources.”

Shield laws in 48 states, however, have found ways to deal with this difficult question in a way that satisfies both the state’s interest in pursuing criminal activity and the public’s interest in ensuring robust coverage of government activity and possible misdeeds.

The existence of laws at a state level implicitly recognizes that without the ability to promise confidentiality to sources, reporters are denied an essential tool of their trade. Confidential sources in government are always reluctant to come forward. The absence of a shield law that protects them and reporters they communicate with hardens that reluctance.

The federal government is loath to extend a similar blanket guarantee of protection, contending that its obligation to protect national security makes it different from the states.

A well-crafted shield law, however, would recognize the difference between cases of extreme and urgent sensitivity — when journalists would have to cooperate — and instances when the government merely seeks to cover up embarrassing or inconvenient disclosures with no genuine security implications. That is information the public needs to have.

In recent days there has been positive movement that suggests now is time for supporters to step up their activity. House members voted 225 to 183 late last month to approve an amendment to an appropriations bill that would bar the Justice Department from using funds that would “compel a journalist or reporter to testify” about confidential sources.

While this action is welcome as a sign of sentiment among a majority of lawmakers, it is not an adequate substitute for a well-thought-out solution that strikes a balance between the freedom to report important information and national security. Nor does it grapple with the issue of who can claim protection as a journalist.

The amendment would not be permanent, since funds are appropriated for only one spending term.

Last September, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved legislation that contains most of the essential elements of a robust protective measure, with bipartisan backing. Then the bill went nowhere. A threatened filibuster has kept it from coming to a floor vote.

In the interval, Attorney General Eric Holder has met with representatives of the news media and revised Justice Department regulations to make it harder to issue a subpoena for a reporter’s notes. “As long as I'm attorney general, no reporter who is doing his job is going to jail,” he said recently.

Ultimately, we should not have to rely on the goodwill of a government official to protect the pub-lic’s right to know. That’s why advocates of the First Amendment must keep pressuring Congress to approve a federal shield law.

Read more Editorials stories from the Miami Herald

  • Miami Herald | EDITORIAL

    Filling the bench

    OUR OPINION: The selection of judges a problem in the Florida gubernatorial race

  • Miami Herald | EDITORIAL

    Black eye for the region

    OUR OPINION: Venezuela does not deserve support for Security Council seat

  •  
Florida State Prison in Starke, the department’s largest prison.

    Miami Herald | EDITORIAL

    Crime in Florida’s prisons

    OUR OPINION: Corrections secretary must push — hard — for reform

Miami Herald

Join the
Discussion

The Miami Herald is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere on the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

The Miami Herald uses Facebook's commenting system. You need to log in with a Facebook account in order to comment. If you have questions about commenting with your Facebook account, click here.

Have a news tip? You can send it anonymously. Click here to send us your tip - or - consider joining the Public Insight Network and become a source for The Miami Herald and el Nuevo Herald.

Hide Comments

This affects comments on all stories.

Cancel OK

  • Marketplace

Today's Circulars

  • Quick Job Search

Enter Keyword(s) Enter City Select a State Select a Category