Even more fun from the Supreme Court
Jun. 27th, 2005 04:20 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sleepymaggieNow we've got a ruling that states that reporters *must* tell the government about their confidential sources.
From SCOTUS blog:
"The Supreme Court on Monday turned aside pleas by two reporters and a magazine urging the Justices to create, for the first time, a right not to be forced to reveal to the government their confidential news sources. The action means that, at least for the time being, the Constitution and federal common law do not recognize a “reporter’s privilege” of confidentiality. (The Court denied review in Miller v. U.S., 04-1507, Cooper and Time Magazine v. U.S., 04-1508.)"
This really seems like a denial of first amendment rights. What about Watergate and Deep Throat? They managed to keep him under wraps for decades because of freedom of the press -- that's no longer legal somehow. Hopefully this will be reversed somehow.
From SCOTUS blog:
"The Supreme Court on Monday turned aside pleas by two reporters and a magazine urging the Justices to create, for the first time, a right not to be forced to reveal to the government their confidential news sources. The action means that, at least for the time being, the Constitution and federal common law do not recognize a “reporter’s privilege” of confidentiality. (The Court denied review in Miller v. U.S., 04-1507, Cooper and Time Magazine v. U.S., 04-1508.)"
This really seems like a denial of first amendment rights. What about Watergate and Deep Throat? They managed to keep him under wraps for decades because of freedom of the press -- that's no longer legal somehow. Hopefully this will be reversed somehow.
