Sen. Chuck Grassley could have helped pass the most important press freedom legislation in modern times in 2022. The PRESS Act would stop federal agencies and judges from forcing journalists to burn their sources, except to stop terrorism or other life or death emergencies. It would also stop them from spying on journalists through technology providers. <\/p>\n
But Grassley, then the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, didnt push for the ACTs inclusion in must-pass legislation in the closing days of the 117th Congress not because he didnt approve of it, but out of respect for a Senate colleague. The bill failed, to the dismay of First Amendment advocates. <\/p>\n
Now, with the PRESS Act back in the Senate, Grassley has a chance to make things right. <\/p>\n
Iowas senior senator has long been a champion of First Amendment values. Hes been vocal about protecting whistleblowers from retaliation when they expose wrongdoing. Keeping federal agents' and prosecutors hands off reporters notebooks and phone records so that the Fourth Estate can do its job is consistent with everything Grassley stands for. <\/p>\n
Nonetheless, he reportedly declined to advance the bill for inclusion in a year-end legislative package because of objections from Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton. Cotton stubbornly insisted that the PRESS Act is a gift to the liberal media, ignoring that the legislation equally protects all journalists and news outlets liberal or conservative, big or small, corporate or independent. Thats why its passed the House without objection two years running, and why 49 red and blue states protect journalist-source confidentiality. <\/p>\n
Grassleys track record shows he knows press freedom is not a partisan issue. But his practice as the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee was reportedly to not include legislation in year-end bills that other committee Republicans opposed, regardless of why. His reasons for adopting that policy are commendable, but his professional courtesy has, unfortunately, allowed threats to press freedom to persist. <\/p>\n
A year and change later, journalists like former Fox and CBS investigative reporter Catherine Herridge, and Twitter Files reporter Matt Taibbi, are still being ordered or otherwise pressured to out their confidential sources. Herridge, days after being laid off by CBS, was held in contempt of court and fined $800 a day (the fine is stayed as she appeals) for refusing to break her promises to her sources. These incidents undoubtedly lead others with information about malfeasance to think twice about coming forward. <\/p>\n
The PRESS Act could change that, and its now far better positioned to pass than it was in 2022. Sen. Lindsey Graham is now the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee and hes co-sponsoring the bill. So is Sen. Dick Durbin, the committee chair, in addition to Sens. Ron Wyden and Mike Lee, who were the sole Senate sponsors last time around. <\/p>\n
Last time, the bill got caught in the year-end rush, leaving no time for regular order and for critics of the bill to have their say hence Grassleys unwillingness to look past Cottons objections. This year, though, there will be plenty of time for debate so that Cotton and any other critics of the bill can be heard and, hopefully, voted down. <\/p>\n
As they should be. Contrary to Cottons objections, presidents from both parties abuse the law to retaliate against journalists who embarrassed them. Yes, Republican administrations have spied on journalists phone and email records and threatened to jail reporters who wouldnt reveal sources but so did Barack Obama. <\/p>\n
After Joe Bidens administration initially continued Trumps newsroom surveillance, his Department of Justice issued a policy against such practices. But the DOJ does not appear to be abiding by its policy, which a future administration can abolish with the stroke of a pen. <\/p>\n
And, especially in this era of hyper-politicization, people tend to forget that the vast majority of journalism has nothing to do with the White House. Local prosecutors and litigants issue federal subpoenas targeting reporters sources for stories on everything from crime to sports. Americans of all political stripes want journalists to be able to report news that matters to them and their communities, no matter who is president. <\/p>\n
Like other privileges long-recognized by U.S. courts, including for lawyers and clients, therapists and patients and even married couples, the journalist-source privilege isnt about giving reporters special treatment. Its about recognizing the value of the free press for our democracy. News sources often risk their jobs or even their freedom to expose abuses. The more likely sources are to be outed, the less likely they are to come forward. <\/p>\n
Grassley already has a legacy of standing up for free speech. But helping advance the PRESS Act would further that legacy immeasurably. <\/p>\n
Seth Stern is the director of advocacy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation and a First Amendment lawyer. <\/p>\n
Opinion content represents the viewpoint of the author or The Gazette editorial board. You can join the conversation by submitting a letter to the editor or guest column or by suggesting a topic for an editorial to editorial@thegazette.com<\/a> <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Go here to read the rest: Sen. Chuck Grassley could have helped pass the most important press freedom legislation in modern times in 2022. Continue reading
\nOpinion: Sen. Chuck Grassley should stand up for the First Amendment and support the PRESS Act - The Gazette<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"