A Precedent for Press Freedom

[groovedaddy]

Faced with prosecutorial demands to know journalists’ confidential sources, judges bow too often to the government’s wishes without considering carefully enough whether a need for the information to make the government’s case outweighs the needs and rights of reporters and an informed public.

In the most recent such case, though, a federal trial judge struck a blow for the freedom of the press and the public’s right to know. She rebuffed an ill-conceived effort by prosecutors from the Justice Department to require the author of a 2006 book about the Central Intelligence Agency to provide testimony revealing a confidential source. (The ruling has special resonance for us because the book’s author, James Risen, is a reporter for The New York Times.)

The ruling was a departure from some other prominent cases involving government demands that journalists disclose their sources, in which judges failed to adequately scrutinize the government’s stated rationale or weigh the serious constitutional harm in impeding the gathering of newsworthy information the public needs to hold powerful institutions and individuals accountable.

Last week, Judge Leonie Brinkema of the Federal District Court in Alexandria, Va., declined to rubber-stamp government lawyers’ claims that it was necessary to compel Mr. Risen to reveal a confidential source when he testifies in the trial of Jeffrey Sterling, a former C.I.A. employee accused of leaking classified information. The government says Mr. Sterling provided material for a chapter in Mr. Risen’s book detailing a botched effort by the agency to sabotage Iranian nuclear research in 2000.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/04/opinion/a-precedent-for-press-freedom.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha211

[libguy_6731]

1. +1

[red dog 1]

2. Glad to see a judge with guts!..Too bad DOJ still wastes it's time going after whistleblowers.