Last week, the Washington Post published leaked transcripts of President Donald Trumps January phone calls with Mexican President Enrique Pea Nieto and Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull. Even with the administration beset by daily embarrassing leaks, this one was shocking, going well beyond the mere embarrassing portrayals of daily White House dysfunction. It is fair to presume that such transcripts are classified, and when asked about them, National Security Council spokesman Michael Anton said only that he cant confirm or deny the authenticity of allegedly leaked classified documents.
So nobody should have been surprised that on Friday morning, Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats held a press conference condemning the many leaks and vowing investigation and prosecution of those responsible. Sessions called for discipline in executive agencies and Congress to stem leaks. He indicated that since January, the Department of Justice has tripled the number of active leak investigations, and he announced a new FBI counterintelligence unit to manage them.
But then Sessions got to the press: One of the things we are doing is reviewing policies affecting media subpoenas. We respect the important role that the press plays and will give them respect, but it is not unlimited. They cannot place lives at risk with impunity. We must balance the presss role with protecting our national security and the lives of those who serve in the intelligence community, the armed forces, and all law-abiding Americans. Coats reiterated that the administration is prepared to take all necessary steps to identify individuals who illegally expose and disclose classified information.
This marks a serious intervention in a delicate, decades-long balancing act between the federal government and professional journalists. A change in the policy about press subpoenas could have grave consequences for the government and press alike.
A subpoena is the legal tool that forces an individual to testify or produce evidence. When subpoenas are issued to journalists (or their communications providers) in leak investigations, it is most often for the purpose of identifying a leaker: Match the relevant reporters telephone records to an individual with access to the classified information or better yet, force the reporter to testify directly as to the source and youve got your leaker. But youve also compromised the presss ability to protect their sources, undermining their ability to do their job.
Reporters who refuse to reveal their sources in compliance with such subpoenas risk contempt charges. To enforce subpoenas, courts and Congress have the authority to bring contempt charges against those who refuse to comply with lawful orders. Contempt charges aim to compel compliance with the order and can include jail time. In 2005, New York Times reporter Judith Miller famously submitted to jail time for contempt rather than reveal a confidential source in the Valerie Plame leak investigation. (After two and a half months in jail, Miller was released early when Scooter Libby gave a waiver authorizing the government to question reporters about his conversations with them and Miller agreed to testify.)
Testimony that may otherwise be required by law might be nevertheless protected by a privilege. Such privileges include the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, marital communications privilege, attorney-client privilege, and executive privileges. The question is whether such a privilege does or should apply to reporters, exempting them from revealing sources.
While the Constitution limits government intrusion on the freedom of speech and of the press, the law does not offer absolute protection for journalists against revealing their sources. Congress has not enacted robust protections and the Supreme Court has not interpreted the First Amendment as itself embodying such a privilege nothing approximating a broad press privilege relieving reporters from revealing sources.
Such a privilege is protected at the state level in nearly all states. New Yorks statutory press privilege, for instance, broadly protects professional journalists against contempt charges for refusing or failing to disclose news obtained or received in confidence or the identity of the source of such news coming into such persons possession in the course of gathering or obtaining news for publication.
But no such privilege has been recognized uniformly at the federal level. In 1972, the Supreme Court rejected a broad First Amendment press privilege in Branzburg v. Hayes. Justice Lewis Powell joined the five-justice majority to reject an unqualified press privilege against revealing confidential sources, but wrote a puzzling separate concurrence suggesting some limited privilege subject to a balancing against the governments interest in a particular case. The state of the law remains uncertain but what we do know is that there is currently no broad, unqualified First Amendment privilege against revealing confidential news sources. (Importantly here, the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the District of Columbia has agreed that even if there is a First Amendment press privilege to not reveal sources, the privilege is not absolute.)
Instead, since 1970, the executive branch has voluntarily restrained itself by limiting the situations in which it will subpoena reporters in investigating leaks. Those self-restraints are codified in federal regulation. Those regulations explicitly recognize the need to strike the proper balance among several vital interests: Protecting national security, ensuring public safety, promoting effective law enforcement and the fair administration of justice, and safeguarding the essential role of the free press in fostering government accountability and an open society.
In striking that balance, the Justice Department explains that subpoenas directed to the news media are extraordinary measures, not standard investigatory practices. As such, press subpoenas are to be approved by the attorney general (or other high-ranking DOJ officials in certain limited cases) and are to be issued only where the information is essential and only after all reasonable alternative attempts have been made to obtain the information from alternative sources.
A system of mutual restraint thus governs in the face of indeterminate legal boundaries. Reporters dont want to go to jail and the government doesnt want to provoke a sweeping Supreme Court ruling or congressional enactment of an absolute press privilege. So reporters notify the government of stories to be published and often respect government requests to hold stories for some period of time for national security reasons. The government reserves the right to subpoena in extraordinary cases, but agrees to correspondingly extraordinary procedures.
But critical to making this delicate system work is that the government maintains credibility that the public believes the government pursues leak investigations, particularly those investigations that directly implicate press freedoms, for legitimate national security reasons, not simply because the leak is embarrassing. When the president lambasts leakers for imperiling national security and threatens to subpoena the press over embarrassing leaks, but then retweets news stories he finds favorable even if they are based on highly sensitive classified defense information, he erodes that credibility. He erodes the governments foothold in that delicate balance with the press.
It is unclear what the attorney generals statement about press subpoenas portends for Justice Department policy and for the delicate balance that has held for decades. Some legal commentators have noted that the department itself has a lot to lose in upsetting the status quo and potentially forcing an adverse First Amendment ruling. What is likely a more immediate threat to the balance is a president who lacks any regard for its fragility and for the importance of the governments credibility in its preservation.
Photo credit:Shawn Thew-Pool/Getty Images
Twitter Facebook Google + Reddit
See the article here:
Trump Is Going After Legal Protections for Journalists - Foreign Policy (blog)
- Fifth Amendment - The Text, Origins, and Meaning of the ... - April 26th, 2014 [April 26th, 2014]
- 5th Amendment - Revolutionary War and Beyond - April 26th, 2014 [April 26th, 2014]
- Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution ... - April 26th, 2014 [April 26th, 2014]
- Justices suggest public employees' testimony is protected - April 29th, 2014 [April 29th, 2014]
- HST 330 fifth amendment presentation - Video - May 1st, 2014 [May 1st, 2014]
- Police not sure if Sioux City murder suspect invoked 5th Amendment rights - May 3rd, 2014 [May 3rd, 2014]
- Christie Ally Samson Refuses to Give Documents to Lawmakers - May 4th, 2014 [May 4th, 2014]
- House votes to hold ex-IRS official in contempt - May 8th, 2014 [May 8th, 2014]
- House votes to hold ex-IRS official Lois Lerner in contempt of Congress - May 8th, 2014 [May 8th, 2014]
- House holds Lois Lerner in contempt - May 8th, 2014 [May 8th, 2014]
- House votes to hold former IRS official in contempt - May 8th, 2014 [May 8th, 2014]
- Articles about Fifth Amendment - Los Angeles Times - May 9th, 2014 [May 9th, 2014]
- Former PA Chairman Samson Pleads Fifth - Video - May 9th, 2014 [May 9th, 2014]
- GOP-led House votes to hold former IRS official in contempt - May 12th, 2014 [May 12th, 2014]
- No plans to arrest Lois Lerner, John Boehner says - May 13th, 2014 [May 13th, 2014]
- Im not going to testify: Witness pleads Fifth Amendment during Bangor triple murder trial - May 13th, 2014 [May 13th, 2014]
- Attorney: Defense told Corso will take Fifth - May 16th, 2014 [May 16th, 2014]
- Spokane County workers use Fifth Amendment in back-dating case - Thu, 22 May 2014 PST - May 22nd, 2014 [May 22nd, 2014]
- Shawn Vestal: County permit clerical mishap raises eyebrows - Fri, 23 May 2014 PST - May 23rd, 2014 [May 23rd, 2014]
- Sexual abuse measure could lead to wrongful convictions, attorneys say - August 31st, 2014 [August 31st, 2014]
- 5th Amendment - Laws.com - August 31st, 2014 [August 31st, 2014]
- Wildstein takes the 5th - Video - August 31st, 2014 [August 31st, 2014]
- Fifth Amendment (United States Constitution ... - September 2nd, 2014 [September 2nd, 2014]
- New bill a powerful tool to imprison sex offenders - September 3rd, 2014 [September 3rd, 2014]
- Cristin Milioti in The Good Wife - Julianna Margulies - Video - September 4th, 2014 [September 4th, 2014]
- Kansas Supreme Court: Grand jury violated man's Fifth Amendment rights - September 6th, 2014 [September 6th, 2014]
- Attorney Gwendolyn Solomon Petitions United States Supreme Court to Review Tenth Circuits Decision in Case of the IRP6 - September 9th, 2014 [September 9th, 2014]
- Texas man's conviction overturned because of Fifth Amendment violation - September 10th, 2014 [September 10th, 2014]
- Cop Says 'You Must Be Doing Something Wrong if You Invoke Your Rights' (Video) - September 12th, 2014 [September 12th, 2014]
- Public be damned Litchfield latest example - September 14th, 2014 [September 14th, 2014]
- Volokh Conspiracy: What the posse comitatus case might mean for the future of the exclusionary rule - September 15th, 2014 [September 15th, 2014]
- Fifth Amendment - Video - September 15th, 2014 [September 15th, 2014]
- Top 5 Constitution-Related Searches at FindLaw.com - September 19th, 2014 [September 19th, 2014]
- The Fifth Amendment Eminent Domain - Video - September 19th, 2014 [September 19th, 2014]
- Apple And Google Will Force A Legal Battle Over The Privacy Of Your Passcode - September 20th, 2014 [September 20th, 2014]
- Civics- The Fifth Amendment (Sarah Hutchinson) - Video - September 20th, 2014 [September 20th, 2014]
- Google and Apple Wont Unlock Your Phone, But a Court Can Make You Do It - September 22nd, 2014 [September 22nd, 2014]
- GOP fumes over Lerner remarks - September 23rd, 2014 [September 23rd, 2014]
- Assistant to DeKalb CEO Ellis invokes 5th Amendment 30 times - September 23rd, 2014 [September 23rd, 2014]
- GOP fumes as Lois Lerner talks to press but snubs Congress - September 24th, 2014 [September 24th, 2014]
- Cry us a river, Lois Lerner - September 24th, 2014 [September 24th, 2014]
- Can You Go to Jail for Refusing to Testify? - September 25th, 2014 [September 25th, 2014]
- Fifth Amendment Projectb - Video - September 25th, 2014 [September 25th, 2014]
- The Commander Cody Band - Take The Fifth Amendment - 8/5/1977 - Convention Hall (Official) - Video - September 27th, 2014 [September 27th, 2014]
- Joey Gallo Takes The Fifth Amendment - Video - September 29th, 2014 [September 29th, 2014]
- Batavia High School teacher John Dryden retires from school district - October 3rd, 2014 [October 3rd, 2014]
- Batavia High School teacher John Dryden retires - October 4th, 2014 [October 4th, 2014]
- The Fifth Amendment Please Don't Leave Me Now - Video - October 6th, 2014 [October 6th, 2014]
- Man Denied Fifth Amendment While In Court Wearing Anti-Police Shirt, Still Won His Case (Video) - October 7th, 2014 [October 7th, 2014]
- Batavia teacher previously involved in Fifth Amendment dispute retires - October 7th, 2014 [October 7th, 2014]
- INFORMUCATE: THE FIFTH AMENDMENT - Video - October 8th, 2014 [October 8th, 2014]
- Fairholme Funds Appeals Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Verdict - October 10th, 2014 [October 10th, 2014]
- Fresno Police Officer violated fifth amendment at a dui checkpoint. - Video - October 10th, 2014 [October 10th, 2014]
- Code cases: Police want phone access, but some pass - October 12th, 2014 [October 12th, 2014]
- Fresno Police Officer violated fifth amendment at a dui checkpoint. part 2 - Video - October 12th, 2014 [October 12th, 2014]
- Property Rights | Century Law Group - Video - October 20th, 2014 [October 20th, 2014]
- Agents questioned, Askar takes the Fifth in Trombetta hearing - October 21st, 2014 [October 21st, 2014]
- Scott and Crist have heated and personal final debate before November election - October 22nd, 2014 [October 22nd, 2014]
- Detective dodges questions about allegations made during rape investigation - October 25th, 2014 [October 25th, 2014]
- Disciplinary hearing for SB officer moved to later date - Video - October 27th, 2014 [October 27th, 2014]
- Judge Rules Suspect Can Be Required To Unlock Phone With Fingerprint - October 31st, 2014 [October 31st, 2014]
- Virginia judge: Police can demand a suspect unlock a phone with a fingerprint - October 31st, 2014 [October 31st, 2014]
- Court rules: Touch ID is not protected by the Fifth Amendment but Passcodes are - October 31st, 2014 [October 31st, 2014]
- Virginia Court: LEOs Can Force You To Provide Fingerprint To Unlock Your Phone - November 1st, 2014 [November 1st, 2014]
- Civil Rights and Civil Liberties - Fifth Amendment - Shh! The Right to Remain Silent - Video - November 1st, 2014 [November 1st, 2014]
- Your Fingerprints Belong To Us: Iphone Users Forfeit 5th Amendment - Video - November 2nd, 2014 [November 2nd, 2014]
- All Your Fingerprints Are Belong To Us: iPhone Users Forfeit Fifth Amendment - Video - November 2nd, 2014 [November 2nd, 2014]
- Log into Tax-News+ - November 4th, 2014 [November 4th, 2014]
- Editorial: Applying the Fifth Amendment in the era of smartphones - November 4th, 2014 [November 4th, 2014]
- Volokh Conspiracy: Virginia state trial court ruling on the Fifth Amendment and smart phones - November 4th, 2014 [November 4th, 2014]
- Fingerprints: iPhone Users Forfeit Fifth Amendment. - Video - November 4th, 2014 [November 4th, 2014]
- New ruling may affect police access to smartphones - Video - November 6th, 2014 [November 6th, 2014]
- Why the Constitution Can Protect Passwords But Not Fingerprint Scans - November 7th, 2014 [November 7th, 2014]
- Virginia state trial court ruling on the Fifth Amendment ... - November 7th, 2014 [November 7th, 2014]
- Is taking the fifth amendment a bad idea? - Video - November 7th, 2014 [November 7th, 2014]
- IT Security TV Show 4 November 2014 - iPhone Users Forfeit Fifth Amendment - Video - November 7th, 2014 [November 7th, 2014]
- the fifth amendment happy parody project song for connections - Video - November 8th, 2014 [November 8th, 2014]
- 13-year-olds murder conviction overturned - November 11th, 2014 [November 11th, 2014]
- Your Fifth Amendment Rights DO NOT Cover Biometrics - Video - November 11th, 2014 [November 11th, 2014]
- Philadelphia charter school officials pleaded Fifth 77 times - November 12th, 2014 [November 12th, 2014]