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

A delegation of Australian politicians 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. 

Our executive director, Trevor Timm, also spoke 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 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, our deputy advocacy director, Caitlin Vogus, and First Amendment attorney Steve Zansberg explain the laundry list of errors in Hogan’s recent order extending 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 with NSO Group’s Pegasus spyware in Berlin and that the invasion went undetected for months is an alarming reminder of how important it is for journalists to secure their devices and communications.

As we explain on our blog, 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). 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’. A private university dismissed its student newspaper’s advisor, claiming that he taught “too much investigative journalism” 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 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. A billionaire hedge fund owner subpoenaed ProPublica seeking information about the sources for its reporting 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, the bipartisan federal shield law for journalists that’s pending in Congress, is so badly needed. 

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 and/or share it with your newsroom.