[PAULYPOKER]

US court rules reporters have no First Amendment protection


New York Times reporter James Risen is compelled to testify
at the criminal trial of a former CIA agent who is being
prosecuted for disclosing government secrets.


In a blow to investigative journalism, a federal appeals court in the United States has ruled that reporters have no First Amendment protection that would keep their sources confidential in the case of a criminal trial.

Two judges from the Virginia-based fourth US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that New York Times reporter James Risen must testify at the criminal trial of a former CIA agent who is being prosecuted for disclosing government secrets.

In a two-to-one ruling, the court of appeals overturned a ruling by a lower court judge who found that Risen is protected by the First Amendment.

The ruling is a winning for the administration of President Barack Obama which has been vigorously pursuing and punishing whistleblowers.

Judge William Traxler, who has written the ruling, stated that even when a reporter has confidentiality agreement with a source, "there is no first amendment testimonial privilege, absolute or qualified, that protects a reporter from being compelled to testify … in criminal proceedings."

Risen ,a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist, is now compelled to give testimony in court about former CIA operations officer Jeffrey Alexander Sterling as the source of his book entitled “State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration.”

“He is the only one who can identify Sterling as the perpetrator of the charged offenses, and he is the only one who can effectively address Sterling’s expected efforts to point the finger at others,” Judge Traxler said.

In 2010, Sterling was indicted on ten charges relating to Risen’s book, including unauthorized disclosure of national defense information.

He is the seventh former government employee to face prosecution under the Espionage Act since Obama took office.

Former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden has recently disclosed to the news media two secret surveillance programs by the spying agency. The case has ignited a passionate debate about government secrecy and violation of citizens’ constitutional rights by the government through bulk-collecting their phone and Internet records.

[d2bets]

Your headline is rather misleading. Basically, the reporter wants a special protection for media that ordinary citizens don't have. This court said no. Not saying I agree, but just to set the record straight.