Republicans angered by Twitter Files hearing should pass the PRESS Act

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]) .

Julian Assange. Credit: Cancillería del Ecuador

Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF) executive director Trevor Timm participated in a Congressional briefing titled “Can the First Amendment Survive the Assange Extradition?” on Thursday. He was joined by representatives of other press freedom and civil liberties groups including the ACLU, Reporters Without Borders and Defending Rights and Dissent.

Trevor explained that prosecuting Julian Assange — no matter what you think of the man himself — for receiving and publishing information from a source “directly affects how all journalists do their jobs and could potentially criminalize large aspects of how they gather news.” A successful prosecution, he said, would enable officials to threaten prosecution as “a tool to lord over any journalist that they’re in disagreement with.”

He said the government’s characterization of Assange’s prosecution as a hacking case, even though 17 of the 18 charges in his indictment have nothing to do with hacking, is intended to “throw us off the scent that this prosecution could affect journalists at literally every newspaper in the country.” The government, he explained, is pursuing charges under the overbroad and unconstitutional ([link removed]) Espionage Act that have “nothing to do with espionage … instead of using it against actual spies, [prosecutors use it] in a lot of cases against government sources.”

The briefing follows a joint statement ([link removed]) last November from editors and publishers of leading newspapers calling for charges against Assange to be dropped.


** Twitter Files congressional hearings underscore need for PRESS Act
------------------------------------------------------------

Conservative politicians and media outlets were outraged last week when Democratic representatives called Matt Taibbi a “so-called journalist” and urged him to identify his sources during Congressional hearings on the Twitter Files.

But, last year, Republicans on the Senate judiciary committee stopped the bipartisan PRESS Act ([link removed]) — which would bar the government from compelling journalists to reveal sources — from being included in Congress’s year-end omnibus package and becoming the law of the land.

We urged Republicans ([link removed]) to “seize on this moment” to bring the act to the floor for a vote this year because “everyone benefits when the press can expose government wrongdoing by working with sources who do not need to fear for their jobs or freedom.”

Neither political party has proven able to resist the temptation to surveil the press and the hearings should put an end to any argument that the PRESS Act would only benefit the “liberal media.” Conservatives angered by last week’s events should turn their outrage into action when the PRESS Act is reintroduced in the current Congress.


** Immigration law could enable further prosecutions for routine journalism
------------------------------------------------------------

The Espionage Act has taught us that even laws that don’t directly target journalists can threaten press freedoms. One troubling example is an immigration law that criminalizes “encouraging” or “inducing” people to cross the border illegally. Arguments regarding the constitutionality of that law will be heard by the Supreme Court on March 27.

We explained on our blog ([link removed]) that the law “could also have serious repercussions for journalism outside the immigration context.” For example, “if a news report can be deemed illegal for giving migrants ideas on how to cross the border, why can’t the same reasoning apply to, say, criticism of police departments that exposes incompetencies that criminals might exploit?”

Further, a decision for the government could facilitate further prosecutions of routine newsgathering, like the case against Assange, "by setting a precedent at the Supreme Court level that journalists may be prosecuted for the actions of others.” We explained that, if Congress can hold journalists responsible for their sources’ actions, “practices as common as asking government employees for information, or providing a means to transmit leaked records confidentiality, could theoretically suffice for an indictment.”

FPF joined a brief ([link removed]) (PDF), along with a group of other press freedom organizations, opposing the overbroad law. We urge the Supreme Court to reiterate its past holdings ([link removed]) that journalists cannot be punished for the actions of either their sources or their readers.


** Help save the Internet Archive
------------------------------------------------------------
The Internet Archive is an absolutely incredible resource for journalists — and the entire public. It's the unique home to vast amounts of human knowledge and it's a shining symbol of freedom of information.

Right now, it's under serious legal attack, as publishers are suing to cut off libraries’ ownership and control of digital books. Arguments in the case are scheduled for Monday. Read more here ([link removed]) and sign the petition to show your support.


** New board president discusses FPF’s past and future
------------------------------------------------------------

FPF co-founder and new board president Rainey Reitman blogged about ([link removed]) her history with, and vision for, FPF. “From the start, we designed FPF to be an organization that could be nimble and fearless. Today, I am so proud to see FPF is willing to take big risks and stand firm in our principles,” she wrote.

She listed important press freedom issues that FPF has and will continue to prioritize, including everything from international controversies like the prosecutions of Assange and FPF board member Edward Snowden to little-known press freedom violations like the prosecution of Derek Myers ([link removed]) for publishing a source’s recording.
She also highlighted FPF’s efforts to protect journalists and whistleblowers through projects like the open-source whistleblower submission system SecureDrop ([link removed]) and the digital security training and resources ([link removed]) we provide to journalists worldwide.


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

Abortion pill access case: Judge wants ‘less advertisement’ ([link removed]) . The judge presiding over a case challenging access to medical abortions asked attorneys not to publicize a hearing last Wednesday to avoid a “circus-like atmosphere.” He’d previously intentionally delayed docketing the hearing in Amarillo, Texas, making it difficult for journalists and others to arrange travel (the closest airport is hours away). We noted that ([link removed]) a “‘courtesy” request to not publicize a hearing is a gag order by another name. “Lawyers won’t risk upsetting the judge deciding their case.”

New bill would turn on cameras at Supreme Court arguments ([link removed]) . Sens. Dick Durbin and Chuck Grassley teamed up to introduce the Cameras in the Courtroom Act to televise Supreme Court arguments. Past efforts have failed but the case against cameras in court loses credibility by the day. State courts continue to televise trials and experiment with remote access. A four-year pilot program ([link removed]) in the federal courts drew overwhelmingly positive feedback. Whatever harms the anti-transparency crowd once predicted have simply not materialized. And Americans saw the benefits of C-SPAN’s improved access ([link removed]) on the House floor during the speakership debate in January. This should be the year when we can finally watch the Supreme Court in action
without flying to Washington D.C.

My fifty years with Dan Ellsberg ([link removed]) . Investigative journalist Seymour Hersh wrote about his decades-long professional and personal relationship with FPF co-founder and board member Dan Ellsberg, who recently announced ([link removed]) that he was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. Ellsberg also discussed ([link removed]) the prosecution of Julian Assange and its implications for press freedoms with Kevin Gosztola, author of a recent book on the subject, earlier this month.


** New Digital Security Newsletter
------------------------------------------------------------

FPF has a new weekly newsletter on digital security and journalism! It’ll be a short update on digital security news, what you can do about it, and other news from our team. Subscribe here ([link removed]) .

— Seth Stern, Director of Advocacy
[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])
.