Supreme Court Won't Hear Reporter's Appeal; James Risen May Now Face Jail For Not Revealing Sources
from the shameful dept
Unfortunately, it appears that the Supreme Court has decided not to hear reporter James Risen's appeal in the case in which he has been subpoenaed to testify, concerning CIA leaks. Risen had refused to testify, claiming that as a reporter he was entitled to keep his sources confidential. Last summer, the 4th Circuit appeals court said that Risen could be compelled to testify and to give up his sources. The court refused a request to rehear the case en banc (with a full slate of judges, rather than just a 3 judge panel). He then appealed to the Supreme Court, leading to today's rejection.The DOJ, of course, had vigorously argued that the Supreme Court should reject Risen's appeal (ridiculously, it did this the same day the State Department launched a "free the press" campaign). Last week, we noted that some were interpreting Eric Holder's comments to mean that he would not seek jail time for Risen, should he continue to refuse to testify, but a closer reading of Holder's comments said no such thing.
It appears we may now find out the truth. If Risen continues to protect his sources, the ball will be in the DOJ's court: will it give up or will it pursue throwing a widely respected reporter in jail? One would hope that a basic sense of common decency would lead the DOJ to give up this ridiculous fight, but the DOJ doesn't have much of a history of common decency.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: doj, eric holder, first amendment, james risen, protecting sources, shield law, supreme court
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Considering that this administration...
Yeah, see ya, James Risen, you might get out when a decent... Oh what am I saying? You're going to be in prison for the rest of your life because there's no good Presidential candidates coming up.
Seriously, does anyone think that Hilary Clinton or any Republican candidate is any different than Obama is?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I'm going to guess option 3: sling mud at a widely respected journalist until he is no longer widely respected and then throw him in jail.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
a basic sense of common decency
-
Fairies wear boots and ya gotta believe me.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
people vs press vs govt
but the press certainly does.
so I kind of hope that he does go to jail, to see if that will be enough to put the press on a confrontational footing with the govt. hopefully leading to some changes in opinion of the govt by the people.
which is one step towards changing the govt.
just 999 more steps to go.
(not referencing the 9-9-9 plan) :-P
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Not backing down
But then it will be too late.
IMHO...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Judith Miller etc
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hint: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1073241
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Silver lining
[ link to this | view in thread ]
It will make a great book
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
SCOTUS is a joke...
When you regularly see decisions split along political/party lines then you know that these clowns are not there to administer justice! They are there instead to protect the cronies that got them appointed in the first place! They regularly create law where it does not exist and they ignore the constitution whenever needed!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: people vs press vs govt
[ link to this | view in thread ]
LOL
You have a couple of option
1. Its time to either give up and just keep consuming and roll over and take it up the ass.
2. Time to get off your asses and tell the government no more and overthrow them.
I will be betting heavily on the first one.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: LOL
This case is very interesting because the ruling dates back 45 years. This is not a new issue. Rather, the courts in a balanced and considered judgement ruled that the first amendment doesn't specifically include any press shield provisions, and that there are circumstances where a reporter may be compelled to divulge sources. This particular case is a good example, as the reporter's information and it's source are key to determining guilt or innocence. So you have to weigh the harm done compared to the public's right for justice to be served.
The circumstances are reasonable exceptional, and the panel's 2-1 decision seems to take that into account. There is a point where a reporter keeping his knowledge of a crime or keeping the source of a confession away from police crossed into aiding and abetting the crime. The reporter here declining to provide the source doesn't just shield the source from public scrutiny or infamy, but rather protects that individual from paying the price for their crimes. The benefits to the public outweigh what is lost in this particular instance.
No Nazis required
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: LOL
You will show me where the trains are taking people to the gas chambers, and then we can talk about your assertions.
You actually NEED it to get this far before doing something about it?
You are a failure to the human race, just like most humans. Cowardly and unwilling to help your fellow man if it means you have to face a scary authority or thug! You are the type that would stand around and take a picture or look on as a female is raped.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: LOL
He also admits to using TOR, which according to his heroes the RIAA, he's a pirate.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: LOL
God bless the USA, if he/she exists. ( I doubt it )
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Comparison between USA today and Nazi Germany of yesterday
This site regularly highlights the sense of privilege that various sections of your society have in ruling over the masses.
How long this situation will last will depend on how long all levels within your society are willing to keep the status quo.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Considering that this administration...
If Snowden manages to stick where he is for a good decade without getting a felony conviction, he'll be old enough to run as candidate and save America's bacon yet another time.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: free speech
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: people vs press vs govt
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Judith Miller etc
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Comparison between USA today and Nazi Germany of yesterday
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: LOL
"Third World Country should pay through the nose and their first childborn to have access to basic amenities like working plumbing system and education."
I have said no such thing. Why do you lie?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: LOL
Not at all. I am only pointing out that claiming the US today is "as bad as Nazi Germany" is a pretty big stretch.
I am very much willing to help my fellow man, at the speed that my fellow man stops hurting themselves. I don't have a lot of sympathy for people who bang their heads against the wall just because it feels better when they stop. That isn't an accomplishment, that's just common sense.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Considering that this administration...
you need to be a resident of the US for 14 years before running for President.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: LOL
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I ask: when Mr Scalia will finally declare shape of Pentagon unconstitutional?
[ link to this | view in thread ]