Judge gets it wrong in censoring the Post-Dispatch

View this email in your browser ([link removed])
Dear friend of press freedom,

Here are some of the most important stories we’re following from the U.S. and around the world. If you enjoy reading this newsletter, please forward it to friends and family. If someone has forwarded you this newsletter, please subscribe here ([link removed]) .

Londres (Reino Unido), 18 de Agosto 2014


** Australians warn U.S. that Assange case threatens press freedom
------------------------------------------------------------

A delegation of Australian politicians ([link removed]) from across the political spectrum descended upon Washington, D.C., this week to attempt to persuade the U.S. to finally drop the prosecution of Julian Assange.

It’s a national embarrassment that foreign officials have to explain to our government that prosecuting Assange under the Espionage Act — based on accusations that he obtained and published secret documents from a source, just like investigative reporters do all the time — threatens the First Amendment. You can read more about the Assange case and the Australian visit on our blog ([link removed]) .

Our executive director, Trevor Timm, also spoke ([link removed]) to the Daily Beast podcast The New Abnormal about the Assange case. As he explained, “If Julian Assange’s conduct is illegal under the Espionage Act, then dozens and dozens of reporters are breaking the law every day, and that is a real worry in a democracy which could … soon have a president that has openly talked about throwing reporters in jail, and has done so repeatedly.”

Judge gets it wrong in censoring the Post-Dispatch

We’ve written before ([link removed]) about how Judge Elizabeth Hogan ignored the Constitution when she imposed a prior restraint on the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Now, she’s doubled down.

In an op-ed in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch ([link removed]) , our deputy advocacy director, Caitlin Vogus, and First Amendment attorney Steve Zansberg explain the laundry list of errors in Hogan’s recent order extending ([link removed]) the prior restraint.

Vogus and Zansberg wrote:

“Prior restraints — laws or court orders barring the publication of information — are the most extreme, and least tolerable form of censorship. … Prior restraints on the press threaten our democracy by allowing the government to control the media landscape.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly said that they are almost always unconstitutional, striking down attempts to stop publication over and over again. Perhaps most famously, in the Pentagon Papers case, the court rejected attempts to prevent newspapers from printing a secret government history of the Vietnam War given to them by whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg. …

Hogan’s ruling, however, doesn’t bother to grapple with Supreme Court precedent, perhaps because that court has never upheld a prior restraint on the press.”

It’s time to rein in Pegasus

Recent news that an exiled Russian investigative journalist’s phone was infected ([link removed]) with NSO Group’s Pegasus spyware in Berlin and that the invasion went undetected ([link removed]) for months is an alarming reminder of how important it is for journalists to secure ([link removed]) their devices and communications.

As we explain on our blog ([link removed]) , it’s also a reminder that the U.S. government must do more to combat Pegasus and other spyware used against journalists, which threaten press freedom everywhere by exposing information about reporters’ confidential sources and details of unpublished investigations.

We need U.S. legislation that permanently bars sharing technology with or providing funds to companies that create spyware that targets journalists, human rights activists, and dissidents. The government must also enforce computer crime laws against NSO Group (rather than trying to use these laws to go after journalists ([link removed]) ). Finally, the U.S. should ban government use of any spyware against journalists and other human rights defenders.


** What we’re reading
------------------------------------------------------------

Ashland University dismisses newspaper adviser as administrators complain that student reporters did ‘too much investigative journalism’ ([link removed]) . A private university dismissed its student newspaper’s advisor, claiming that he taught “too much investigative journalism ([link removed]) ” and encouraged student journalists to be “overly persistent.” That’s ridiculous. There’s no such thing as “too much investigative journalism,” and being persistent is part of a reporter’s job, no matter what some officials ([link removed]) think. Ashland University is sending a terrible message to young journalists.

IRS tax returns leak an ‘affront to all citizens,’ Citadel says as Ken Griffin subpoenas ProPublica for documents ([link removed]) . A billionaire hedge fund owner subpoenaed ProPublica seeking information about the sources for its reporting ([link removed]) on his campaign to defeat tax increases for the rich. ProPublica has reiterated its deep commitment to protecting its sources, but it shouldn’t have to worry about responding to a “sprawling” subpoena. That’s why the PRESS Act ([link removed]) , the bipartisan federal shield law for journalists that’s pending in Congress, is so badly needed.
'We need to protect people's rights': Video shows Yuma officer pushing journalist before arrest ([link removed]) . A court blocked enforcement of (and later struck down) Arizona's ridiculous law against recording police up close, but the Arizona Republic reported this week that cops there nonetheless assaulted and arrested a freelance journalist for recording them in May. Efforts in Arizona and elsewhere to require people recording cops to keep a distance are unconstitutional and need to stop ([link removed]) . Also, why isn’t this a national news story like last year’s detention ([link removed]) of a Wall Street Journal reporter in Phoenix? Freelancers and independent journalists’ First Amendment rights are just as important as anyone
else’s.



** Help us protect journalists’ digital security
------------------------------------------------------------

To all journalists reading this: We need your help to learn more about effective digital security messaging so that we can better advocate on safety for journalists. Participate in our (very short) survey ([link removed]) and/or share it with your newsroom.
[link removed]
[link removed]
[link removed]

============================================================
Copyright © 2023 Freedom of the Press Foundation, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you opted in via our website.

Our mailing address is:
Freedom of the Press Foundation
49 Flatbush Ave, #1017
Brooklyn, NY 11217
USA
Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can ** update your preferences ([link removed])
or ** unsubscribe from this list ([link removed])
.