Independent journalist Georgia Fort is stepping up to call attention to retaliation against reporters, including her own ongoing prosecution for covering a protest at a Minnesota church against violence by immigration enforcement officers. Plus, some advice for the next Congress to fix the broken federal transparency system.
Georgia Fort stands up for journalists
Georgia Fort is being prosecuted in a legally dubious case for her coverage of a protest against immigration authorities at a Minnesota church in January. She’s also been the subject of secret subpoenas. Unfortunately, while the scale of the government’s campaign against her is absurd, it’s not unprecedented — across the country, journalists are facing threats, arrests, and violence for keeping the public informed.
Now, Fort is partnering with the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker, a project of Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF), as well as the Committee to Protect Journalists and Protect Democracy, on a video series highlighting the experiences of other journalists under attack and how the public’s right to know has been impacted.
Impeach the president’s censors
Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth may want to pump soldiers up with testosterone, but he’s spent two years trying to neuter the First Amendment. Rep. Thomas Massie’s unsuccessful resolution to remove Hegseth from office included plenty of impeachable offenses but omitted Hegseth’s repeated unconstitutional attacks on the press, including barring reporters who wouldn’t sign his loyalty pledge. Next time, Congress should make sure that Hegseth’s attacks on journalism are front and center in his impeachment articles.
And while they’re at it, they should also impeach Hegseth’s fellow wartime censor, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr. FPF Chief of Advocacy Seth Stern has more in The Intercept.
Reporters denied access to election night events
There were relatively few incidents involving journalists’ rights during the midterms, but the coast wasn’t totally clear: The Tracker uncovered a batch of access denials at election night events, including some apparently in retaliation for outlets’ coverage. In the months to come, we’ll be sure to remind those representatives who won while boxing out the press that an electorate concerned about government corruption probably wants transparency over photo ops.
Journalist-source confidentiality deserves federal protection
Investigative journalist Catherine Herridge has been fighting an order to reveal her confidential sources for years. In August, she asked the Supreme Court to review a finding holding her in contempt of court and imposing an $800-per-day fine. It’s not even the government seeking Herridge’s sources — it’s a civil litigant looking to prove a damages case.
She is in this situation because while 49 states protect journalists from being forced to burn sources, federal law doesn’t. That means that not only federal prosecutors but anyone who files a lawsuit can attempt to commandeer the press to help them prove their case.
As we wrote in a brief supporting her petition, denying journalists the ability to promise confidentiality to their sources deprives them of an essential reporting tool, curbs the free flow of information, and endangers national security. (Urge your representatives to support the PRESS Act, a federal bill to protect journalists and their sources.)
Congress: You can’t investigate if you can’t get records
Democrats won decisive victories in both chambers of Congress last week and are said to be readying a batch of investigations into the Trump administration’s unlawful actions over the past two years. But these investigations are likely to flounder without urgent reinforcement of the nation’s transparency apparatus to ensure that records of the administration’s conduct have actually been preserved and can’t be withheld for trivial, self-serving reasons.
Lauren Harper, FPF’s Daniel Ellsberg chair on government secrecy, wrote for MS NOW about the reforms the next Congress must put in place.
What we’re reading
Plaskett vows ethics legislation on Day One
The U.S. Virgin Islands’ governor-elect called our campaign to modernize the territory’s transparency laws “a great idea.” We look forward to working with her on making it more than an idea — and holding her accountable if needed.
In Trump v. BBC, a judge rewrites the founders’ view of libel
Judge Jeffrey Kuntz claims the founders would’ve opposed safeguards against presidential lawfare because they saw libel against the powerful as especially offensive. But as Matthew Schafer explains, that wasn’t the founders — it was the monarchy they rebelled against.
Judge rejects BBC’s motion to dismiss Trump libel suit
Judge Kuntz, who declined to dismiss Trump’s frivolous federal case against BBC, got the job after declining to dismiss Trump’s frivolous state case against the Pulitzers. If that was Kuntz saying “please,” this looks a lot like “thank you.” Here’s the disciplinary complaint we filed in May.
Justice Dept. mulled naming the Times as conspirator in Comey leak case
Over the last week or so we’ve learned: 1. Department of Justice fired a top lawyer for hesitating to subpoena reporters; 2. Stephen Miller wants to go a step further and arrest journalists for publishing leaks; and now, 3. DOJ considered naming NYT a “conspirator” in its Comey case.
Trump talked with Fed chief, but there’s no record of it on Warsh’s calendar
The Federal Reserve Board is one of the few agencies that proactively posts the agency head’s calendar under the Freedom of Information Act’s proactive disclosure requirements. This story shows why that matters — and why Congress should demand to know why most other agencies ignore this rule.
