It's the Law
But Vermont State's Attorney Dan Davis Elects Not To Prosecute A newspaper photographer was taken into custody by police under a 1917 Vermont treason law for taking pictures of a nuclear power plant. But a prosecutor said he would not press charges.
Wisconsin Seeks to Block Records Suit Latest Attempt To Block Two Major Newspapers from A lawyer hired by the Wisconsin state Ethics Board has filed a motion in Dane County Circuit Court seeking to block two newspapers from reviewing records related to alleged illegal campaign practices by legislative caucuses. The motion filed December 7 seeks to dismiss a lawsuit filed by the Wisconsin State Journal and the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel alleging that the Ethics and Elections boards violated the state's open-records law by refusing to release the documents. The Elections Board has already settled the lawsuit and released its records related to the allegations. The Dane and Milwaukee county district attorneys are investigating allegations of illegal campaigning on state time by employees of the partisan legislative caucuses. The Elections and Ethics boards ended their investigations into the caucuses after reaching an agreement with legislative leaders in October. The Ethics Board argues that the records should remain confidential under state law because they were part of investigations into possible misconduct and could harm the reputation and re-election prospects of elected officials. In the legal brief, attorney Stephen Hurley wrote that a "tension" exists between citizens who have a right to review the activities of elected officials and government employees, and the right of those officials to privacy "in their financial and personal affairs." Given that tension, the Legislature specifically acted in 1977 to keep secret Ethics Board records of investigations that do not become part of subsequent criminal prosecutions, Hurley said. Robert Dreps, a lawyer for the newspapers, declined to comment on the legal brief. The newspapers have until December 21 to file a response. Tattered Cover Bookstore Chain Argues Book Stores should not be required to turn over customer records except as last resort
She argued that the police did not exhaust the other means of obtaining the information they wanted before they obtained a warrant to search the Tattered Cover in April 2000. (After talking to Meskis and Recht, the police agreed to delay their search until the courts could rule on the issue.) Police efforts to search bookstore records have grown dramatically since 1998 when Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr attempted to get a list of books purchased by Monica Lewinsky. Over the last 16 months, there have been four cases in which police obtained a subpoena or search warrant for bookstore records. Two federal courts have ruled that these records have limited First Amendment protection. The Tattered Cover case is the first case to reach a state supreme court. The American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression filed two amicus briefs on behalf of the Tattered Cover, each joined by over a dozen national organizations, including the Association of American Publishers, the American Library Association, and the PEN American Center. Following the supreme court hearing, Meskis said that she was pleased by the way the oral argument had gone. The store's case had been fully presented to the court, she said. A decision is not expected until the spring. Rumsfeld Urged To Protect (Letter sent to Secretary Rumsfeld on Thursday, October 18, 2001) The Honorable Donald H. Rumsfeld Dear Secretary Rumsfeld: In light of the terrorist attacks on September 11, the role of the press in informing the nation about public safety concerns and the military, diplomatic, law enforcement, and intelligence actions of the government will be tested in novel and profound ways. As advocates for journalists and press freedoms, we write to provide the Administration and Congress with steps that we believe are essential for the government to take to ensure that it honors its obligations to the public under the First Amendment. A free and autonomous press is as central to the preservation of democracy as is a strong military. Indeed, news organizations have a distinguished history in this country of providing the public with essential information during times of warfare and national crisis. Journalists have handled knowledge of troop movements and deployments in a responsible manner during past conflicts, just as they have maintained the confidentiality of domestic law enforcement operations. Military public affairs guidelines themselves acknowledge that the dissemination of timely and accurate information concerning combat operations serves the interests of the U.S. armed forces. During the Persian Gulf War, however, the Department of Defense inhibited news coverage of combat operations by forcing reporters and photojournalists into small pools under the control of military officials and by attempting to exercise editorial control over news content. The Pentagon and the news media subsequently reached an accord in 1992 regarding coverage of military campaigns that recognized that "open and independent" reporting would be the norm for such coverage. With combat operations now underway in Afghanistan and possibly developing elsewhere, it is time to make good on that guarantee. Additionally, because this is a crisis on American soil as well as overseas, involving law enforcement and local public health services in addition to the armed forces, information about domestic operations will be as relevant and critical to the public as that about military activities. President Bush and other national leaders have signaled that incursions against terrorist networks will differ from conventional warfare in that they will involve significant covert action, both on international and domestic fronts. We do not deny that secrecy has a place in these operations. The government should protect information as necessary but only for as long as necessary to protect national security. Overclassification dilutes the ability of agencies and others to determine what truly needs protection. It inhibits government officials from communicating effectively, especially if they face threats of criminal prosecution for even harmless disclosures. Journalistic scrutiny of the war on terrorism and publication of dissenting viewpoints are not signs of disloyalty to the nation, but rather expressions of confidence in democratic self-government and fulfillment of the First Amendment function of holding government accountable. Such scrutiny does not diminish respect for the victims of terrorism or the privacy interests of their families. One overarching principle that must guide government-press relations throughout this difficult period is that decisions about what to publish, including the airing of statements issued by avowed enemies of the nation, must ultimately rest with publishers and broadcasters, not with government officials. With the nation having confronted for the first time since the Civil War widespread violence and loss of life within its own borders and continuing to face ongoing threats the American public is in urgent need of reliable news. The abrupt removal of information from Internet websites maintained by federal agencies, for example, which has picked up pace in recent weeks, defeats public confidence in the openness of its government. Recognizing these principles and the extraordinary circumstances in which the country finds itself, we urge government leaders to take the following immediate and long-term actions. Most of the immediate steps involve coverage of military operations; many of the long-term ones concern protection of our liberties at home. We recognize that as the situation changes, this list will evolve with it. The government should promptly: Reaffirm the 1992 Pentagon guidelines on coverage of combat operations, including the commitments to 1) provide journalists with access to all major military units and to special forces where feasible, 2) allow news organizations to use their own communications systems to file reports, and 3) utilize press pools not as a standard device but only when specific circumstances so require, such as when military action is conducted in remote areas; Activate pool coverage of combat operations if that is, under current circumstances, the most likely method of putting reporters close to such operations; Embed reporters in combat situations with troops whenever practicable and consistent with security considerations, as such methods of placing reporters in the field may provide a viable alternative to pool coverage of conflicts in certain circumstances; In consultation with representatives of the news media, establish a clear set of military security ground rules for anti-terrorism initiatives in Afghanistan and elsewhere; Work with the news media to ensure that uplink capabilities with adequate bandwidth exist to allow information to be transmitted in real-time or at least with some immediacy from military theaters of operation back to the American public; Prohibit military officials from engaging in prior security review of news reports; Exert pressure on this nations allies and other foreign governments to grant visas to U.S. journalists wishing to cover military and diplomatic events as they unfold overseas and impress upon foreign governments that threats against journalists or efforts to censor their work are illegitimate; and At home, remove the remaining limitations on flights by helicopters or other aircraft owned or leased by news media, in a manner consistent with public safety, and curtail indiscriminate obstructions to newsgathering and photojournalism, including any such barriers put in place solely in the name of protecting personal privacy. Over the course of the conflict, however long its lasts, the government should also: Establish a joint information bureau in any area where significant military operations occur; If security review of news content is undertaken, 1) conduct such review as quickly as possible, as close to the source of news as possible, and only for the limited purpose of ensuring that troop movements and operations are properly protected; 2) reject across-the-board rules stipulating that certain information may never be published under any circumstances, and 3) examine news content in context and on a case-by-case basis by taking into account the actual dangers presented by each individual story; Release to the public as soon as possible information concerning the identities, charges, and court proceedings against persons arrested and detained in the United States as suspected terrorists and material witnesses pertaining to the September 11 attacks; Make available on a prompt basis the identities of all injured or deceased victims of terrorism against the United States, as well as the identities of any U.S. military persons who are casualties of the nations war on terrorist networks; Refrain from using journalists as tools to gather intelligence and maintain the current policy forbidding intelligence agents from posing as reporters, as such practices compromise the relationships between the press and its sources and put the lives of journalists at risk; Uphold the Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA"), which requires federal agencies to make information available on request unless it falls under one of the nine exemptions in the law; Provide, as called for by the Electronic Freedom of Information Act of 1996, expedited review of FOIA requests submitted by news organizations concerning terrorists attacks or threats against American interests and the nations response thereto; and Allow media organizations and members of the public to observe or photograph evidence of terrorist assaults located on public property, as long as doing so does not interfere with rescue and clean-up workers. Sincerely, California First Amendment Coalition First Amendment Project Freedom of Information Center Investigative Reporters & Editors Jane E. Kirtley National Coalition Against Censorship National Newspaper Association National Press Club Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press Society of Professional Journalists Student Press Law Center |
More Breaking
Legal News
Law - MagPortal.com |
To share legal issues affecting writers, type (or copy
and paste) your contribution
in the box below and click "Submit."
Note: Unless you sign your contribution, it will be published anonymously.
- BACK -
NOTE: All material on this site is copyright protected. No portion of this material may be copied or reproduced, either electronically, mechanically, or by any other means, for resale or distribution without the written consent of the author. All copy has been dated and registered with The Author's Guild. Copyright 2001 by D. J. Herda |