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.

Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF) spearheaded a campaign to secure the release of body camera footage from the arrests of two Asheville journalists who were attempting to document an eviction of a homeless encampment at a public park. 

Our court petition, filed along with the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina and the Committee to Protect Journalists, argues that the public should be allowed to “decide for themselves … whether prosecuting journalists for merely documenting police conducting a newsworthy operation at a public park is a wise use of their money.”

The petition was necessary because North Carolina is one of the only states that does not consider body camera footage a public record.

The journalists, Matilda Bliss and Veronica Coit of the Asheville Blade, were scheduled for trial on Jan. 25. The trial was continued to April 19 after prosecutors attempted to duck First Amendment defenses by merging their trials with non-journalists arrested the same night.

Fortunately, the judge saw through those antics but the repeated delays (the arrests occurred well over a year ago) are offensive under the Sixth Amendment. FPF will continue pushing for prosecutors to drop the charges.

Reporter’s privilege must outlive the reporter   

A judge this week questioned whether the Las Vegas Review-Journal can assert reporter’s privilege — the right to refuse to reveal confidential sources — in response to detectives’ efforts to search devices belonging to slain journalist Jeff German. 

It’s a novel question but the answer has to be yes. Otherwise the reporter’s privilege offers little assurance of confidentiality to any news source who might outlive the journalists they work with. 

Judges considering when to apply the reporter’s privilege should not lose sight of the underlying objective of the privilege. It is meant not just to keep journalists from having to testify, but to prevent the “chilling effect” that occurs when sources are scared to come forward by the risk that they’ll be outed and lose their jobs or their freedom. 

We argue on our blog that any reporter’s privilege that a newspaper cannot assert after the reporter’s death — or that can be circumvented by seeking the same information from someone other than the reporter — fails to serve that purpose.

Sen. Graham should support the PRESS Act

The PRESS Act – the strongest shield bill we’ve ever seen at the federal level – nearly became law in December. It would have ended the federal government’s ability to surveil journalists in all but the most emergency situations.  

Ultimately, Sen. Chuck Grassley, then the senior Republican on the judiciary committee, would not move it forward out of sympathy for Sen. Tom Cotton and his nonsensical objections. But this year the senior Republican on the committee is Lindsey Graham, who has himself supported shield legislation in the past. 

We are optimistic that this can be the year the PRESS Act succeeds. Judiciary chair Sen. Dick Durbin is already on board thanks to FPF’s efforts, but Graham’s support is essential to bipartisan passage. More to come, but for now, we encourage all our readers, especially anyone in South Carolina, to reach out to Graham and express their support for the PRESS Act.

— Seth Stern, Director of Advocacy

What we’re reading