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

Help save the Internet Archive

New board president discusses FPF’s past and future

FPF co-founder and new board president Rainey Reitman blogged about 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 for publishing a source’s recording. 

What we’re reading

My fifty years with Dan Ellsberg. 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 that he was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. Ellsberg also discussed 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.