Blog

Olympian — Nation needs a shield law

The Olympian, Olympia, Wash.
September 25, 2008

When the U.S. Senate adjourned for its summer recess, one of the measures left unsettled was the Free Flow of Information Act of 2008, a measure to shield reporters from having to reveal confidential sources.

The U.S.

The Olympian, Olympia, Wash.
September 25, 2008

When the U.S. Senate adjourned for its summer recess, one of the measures left unsettled was the Free Flow of Information Act of 2008, a measure to shield reporters from having to reveal confidential sources.

The U.S. House of Representatives approved a similar shield bill Oct. 16, 2007, by a vote of 398-21. The Senate Judiciary Committee approved Senate Bill 2035 on Oct. 4, 2007, by a vote of 15-4.

Both presidential candidates, Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. John McCain, have gone on record in support. Clearly, among their Senate colleagues, there is broad, bipartisan backing of the shield legislation. But this summer, Senate Republicans, moving in lockstep, prevented the measure from coming to the floor for a vote.

Now, Rob McKenna, Washington’s attorney general, has stepped forward in an effort to get his fellow Republicans to pass the shield bill.

He and a dozen other Republican state attorneys general have sent a letter to GOP senators urging their favorable vote.

“As our states’ chief law enforcement officers, we are in a unique position to confirm that our shield laws have not resulted in any degradation in our ability to protect our citizens,” the attorneys wrote. “Still, important provisions have been added to this legislation to carefully and thoroughly protect national security and public safety.”

The bill before the Senate protects reporters from disclosing the source of confidential information except in cases of terrorism, national security and personal safety. The bill also does not shield reporters who reveal classified information.

Those are sufficient protections at the federal level and as McKenna notes, “... 49 states and the District of Columbia already have reporter shield laws in place. Failure to approve a federal standard jeopardizes the strength of those laws and chills candid disclosure by legitimate confidential sources. Federal legislation is crucial if our state laws are to provide any meaningful protection.”

McKenna was a strong supporter of Washington’s shield bill and in 2005 filed legal documents with the U.S. Supreme Court urging the nine justices to recognize reporter privileges under federal rules.

McKenna recognizes that the Free Flow of Information Act was written to protect the role of the news media as a check on government, allowing reporters to investigate controversial, important subjects without fear of being inappropriately called into court to reveal secret sources.

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, one of the proponents of the legislation, pleaded with his Republican colleagues to clear the way for passage.

“All of us whether Republican, Democrat or Independent have an interest in enacting a balanced and meaningful shield bill to ensure the free flow of information to the American people,” Leahy said. “Forty-nine states and the District of Columbia currently have codified or common law protections for confidential source information. But, even with these state law protections, the press remains the first stop, rather than the stop of last resort, for our government and private litigants when it comes to seeking information.

“Our time to act is now,” Leahy said. “Our opportunity to act is now. As The Washington Times editorialized July 25, ‘(a) sound shield law guards not the media but something much more vital the public’s right to know.”

Amen.

And more power to Attorney General Rob McKenna in his effort to convince his Republican colleagues to allow a vote on the shield bill.

Archive

Contributors