Well, as it turns out, Mary Trump is not off the hook.
However...
Here’s the ruling:
“Courts have long recognized that reporters are entitled to engage in legal and ordinary newsgathering activities without fear of tort liability - as these actions are at the very core of protected First Amendment Activity.”
And frankly, I’m inclined to agree that the courts SHOULD protect the press. As was noted in the famous SCOTUS case involving the Pentagon Papers:
“Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government. And paramount among the responsibilities of a free press is the duty to prevent any part of the government from deceiving the people...”
And I will argue that the tax filings are of public interest. They were made so by decades of candidates willingly disclosing their filings. When PDJT chose to buck this trend, he stuck out like a sore thumb. It’s not surprising that people—and the press—started asking questions.
And I believe that this kind of transparency (of releasing tax filings) should not be frowned upon. And I don’t think anyone else here truly believes it should be.
My opinion is that in a “government of the people, by the people, and for the people,...” it is the right of the people to be informed about their government and about the people they choose to govern. (Though I do concede that many people choose not to be.)
When our leaders/public servants make the choice not to be transparent, the press goes to work. I wouldn’t have it any other way.
Yeah, we hate what is published by the NYT, Washington Post, CNN,... etc. But if you take away their legal ability to investigate and to publish, you open up a serious can of worms.
Now, I fully expect to get slammed for most of what I just said. I imagine I will be called “anti-Trump.”
I will unabashedly side with a free press every day of the week. Country will definitely come before candidate/office holder with me—any and all candidates.
Also from the ruling on the Pentagon Papers: “In the First Amendment the Founding Fathers gave the free press the protection it must have to fulfill its essential role in our democracy. The press was to serve the governed, not the governors.”
Spot on.
Little Miss Mary Trump, on the other hand... she has some answering to do. I don’t see how the court can protect her on this one. The court ruling states that in order to help out the NYT, she considered that she might have to “smuggle” documents out of her lawyer’s office and that her lawyer GAVE HER PERMISSION to take copies. Why would they do that? Did they advise her to break the terms of her confidentiality agreement? Why would they do THAT? It almost seems like they gave her “permission” to help the NYT so that she’d be sued and they’d be ready to charge her for billable hours. She got SCAMMED. (Don’t expect me to feel sorry for her.)
Did the NYT provide her with a burner phone?