Modesto Bee – Pass media shield law despite veto threat

• By: ASNE staff
• On: 10/30/2007 13:51:15
• In: Shield law editorials

The Modesto (Calif.) Bee
Oct. 22, 2007

Two big news stories involving leaks of information and confidential sources in November and December 2005 highlight the role of the press in the public's right to know what government is doing.

The Washington Post reported in November 2005 that the CIA was operating secret prisons in Europe. The New York Times reported in December of that year that President Bush had authorized eavesdropping without court warrants on international phone calls and e-mails of U.S. residents.

The Bush administration opposed publication of the stories, saying that national security would be jeopardized. The newspapers published the stories anyway and at a key time -- when Congress was debating reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act.

The Bush administration continues to investigate the leaks and journalists may be forced to choose between revealing their sources or going to jail.

In recent years, stories relying on confidential sources have exposed the treatment of soldiers recovering at Walter Reed, resulting in action to improve conditions for our soldiers. They exposed the abuses of detainees at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. The list goes on and on.

The public interest is served in these cases. But there is a hitch. Dozens of reporters in the last few years have been subpoenaed to reveal the identities of confidential sources. Some have gone to jail. This stems the free flow of information and sanctions government intimidation of the press.

Federal courts, on a case-by-case basis, have been attempting to balance the public's right to know with law enforcement's need to prosecute crime. This has produced different views in the different federal circuits on when a journalist has to testify.

Clearly, a uniform law to shield journalists' sources is needed. And in historic and bipartisan fashion, Congress finally is poised to establish one.

On Tuesday, the House passed House Resolution 2102, on a 398-21 vote. We commend all of our representatives for supporting the resolution: Reps. Jerry McNerney, D-Pleasanton; Dennis Cardoza, D-Merced; and George Radanovich, R-Mariposa.

HR 2102 would exempt journalists from identifying confidential sources -- unless a court finds that prosecutors have exhausted all reasonable alternative sources; that there are reasonable grounds to believe a crime has occurred; that the journalist's information is critical to the investigation; or that disclosure is necessary to prevent an act of terrorism, imminent death or significant bodily harm. This is a reasonable balance. The Senate Judiciary Committee approved a companion bill (Senate Bill 2035) on Oct. 4 by a 15-2 vote. Now it's on to a floor vote.

Officials in the Bush administration have said the president will veto the bill on the same grounds they used to oppose publishing the New York Times and Washington Post stories in 2005 -- that it would jeopardize national security. A "Statement of Administration Policy" said the legislation will "encourage more leaks of classified information by giving leakers such a formidable shield behind which they can hide."

Well, yes. That's precisely the point. Sometimes, leaks of information are the only way citizens have of finding out what government is doing in their name.