News Media Update,
Reporters' Committee for Freedom of the Press
11/25/03
Federal judge rules against federal reporter's
privilege
SAN FRANCISCO -- ABC News successfully fought a government
subpoena for tapes and information relating to an undercover
investigation by reporters for the news show "20/20."
However, in granting the motion to quash the subpoena, a federal
judge ruled last week that the First Amendment offers reporters
little protection in criminal cases.
Citing the U.S. Supreme Court's 1972 decision Branzburg v.
Hayes, Judge Susan Illston, of U.S. District Court in San Francisco,
ruled Nov. 18 that the First Amendment does not apply to a subpoena
served to a journalist in a criminal case, unless the government
issued the subpoena in "bad faith."
"The shield in a criminal case is exceptionally thin,"
Illston wrote. "To deploy it, the reporter must demonstrate
that the criminal investigation is proceeding in bad faith, or
that the government has otherwise exhibited 'harassment of newsmen.'
"
Illston also rejected ABC's argument that the subpoena should
be quashed because the government failed to obtain permission
from the Department of Justice before applying for it.
According to Justice Department regulations on issuing subpoenas
to members of the news media, the government must show that a
subpoena is essential to its investigation. However, Illston
found that failure to comply with the regulations do not constitute
independent grounds to quash the subpoena.
Illston decided to grant ABC's motion to quash the subpoena
because the government failed to prove that the information being
sought was relevant and specific to its investigation, or would
make a point different than information already in its possession
-- a requirement for any information sought by subpoena in a
federal criminal court.
The case arose as part of the Internal Revenue Service's criminal
investigation of Jerome Schneider and Eric J. Witmeyer for conspiracy
to defraud the IRS through an offshore banking scheme.
ABC undercover reporters posed as potential clients, and in
interviews with Schneider obtained information about the scheme.
ABC aired excerpts of the interview in April 1997 on "20/20."
The
federal prosecutor in the case against Schneider sought the subpoena
to obtain the program's outtakes.
(U.S. v. Schneider; Media Counsel: Thomas R. Burke, Davis
Wright Tremaine, San Francisco) -- KM
|

Have a legal question?
Check out Asked & Answered first.
Chances are, we've already answered it. If
not, then proceed to CFAC's Legal
Hotline for help from top lawyers—free.
CFAC Archives:
Search CFAC
|