Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: BuckeyeTexan
Actually, this is good news. Here is the case from 1972 that is pertinent. It says that reporters have to answer subpoenas just like every other citizen.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/408/665 Branzburg v. Hayes

That case also says this:

The administration of a constitutional newsman's privilege [p704] would present practical and conceptual difficulties of a high order. Sooner or later, it would be necessary to define those categories of newsmen who qualified for the privilege, a questionable procedure in light of the traditional doctrine that liberty of the press is the right of the lonely pamphleteer who uses carbon paper or a mimeograph just as much as of the large metropolitan publisher who utilizes the latest photocomposition methods.

The efforts now underway to create a federal "shield law" would gut the first amendment. It would be a license to publish

20 posted on 06/02/2014 8:57:09 AM PDT by abb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: abb

A passing thought:

That statement about the liberty of the press with respect to the little guy versus the big guy would lead me to think it correlates to today’s bloggers versus the mainstream media.


23 posted on 06/02/2014 9:13:58 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind. ~Steve Earle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson