New Congress must prioritize press freedom

Dear Friend of Press Freedom:

This week’s midterm elections showed that Americans want Congress to rein in the Trump administration’s abuses — including those against the press and First Amendment. After all, crooked officials attack the press precisely because journalism interferes with whatever other nefarious plans they may have in mind. Read on for more on how you can encourage lawmakers from both parties to prioritize press freedom, as well as about other developments from an important week in the fight against censorship.

New Congress must prioritize press freedom

The next Congress will surely spend plenty of time investigating the Trump administration’s unconstitutional and corrupt practices when it comes to the press — as it should. But that’s not nearly enough. It also needs to pass the systemic fixes long sought by press freedom advocates. The need for these reforms has never been clearer.

This includes the bipartisan PRESS Act, which would protect journalist-source confidentiality by prohibiting federal agencies and courts from forcing journalists or their tech providers to out their sources. The bill was close to passing in 2024, but Donald Trump ordered Republicans to kill it upon winning reelection, and Democrats gave up. We’ve all seen the consequences in the last two years — repeated subpoenas and threats to journalists who report on whistleblower disclosures.

It also includes the Daniel Ellsberg Press Freedom and Whistleblower Protection Act, which would reform the Espionage Act so journalists and whistleblowers who participate in public-interest reporting aren’t treated like spies selling secrets to foreign governments (more on that below). And Congress needs to finally join legislatures in 40 states and Washington, D.C., in passing a law to penalize filers of strategic lawsuits against public participation, or SLAPPs, and strengthening protections against searches and seizures of journalists’ files that Trump’s prosecutors have ignored.

We’ll have plenty more on these bills and others in the weeks to come, but in the meantime you can use our action center to urge your lawmakers to prioritize press freedom.

Amend the Espionage Act

The new Espionage Act charges against former FBI Director James Comey and government contractor Ian Brinksman exemplify how the statute has been used by politicians of both parties: to silence sources and prosecute their political enemies. The law’s vagueness also allows prosecutors to treat whistleblowers and journalists like spies, creating an enormous chilling effect on national security journalism. FPF’s Chief of Advocacy Seth Stern wrote for MS NOW about how the Espionage Act is bad for everyone, regardless of politics. It’s past time to fix it.

Government lies put press freedom in jeopardy

Government attorneys during Trump’s second term have been lying to federal judges and refusing to comply with court orders, according to a recently updated report by nonpartisan law and policy journal Just Security. The cases highlighted include a number involving journalists, the First Amendment, and government transparency. That means Trump’s myriad attacks on press freedom are being compounded by his minions’ legal misconduct — and that judges should be heavily scrutinizing any claims from the administration in press-related cases. FPF’s Advocacy Program Manager Sophie Hagen has more.

California stumbles on election secrecy

In the lead-up to the midterms, Trump did his best to sow distrust in the election process. California Secretary of State Shirley Weber unfortunately played into this distrust by issuing vague guidance implying that photography was unilaterally forbidden near polling stations, even by journalists. As FPF Deputy Director of Advocacy Adam Rose wrote in an open letter to Weber, this could have led to poll workers attempting to exclude journalists, and the press being unable to inform the public on the functioning of the state’s election system.

Pornhub seeks prior restraint against the press

You might think a pornography purveyor would hate censorship and fight to preserve the First Amendment rights to which it owes its existence. But that apparently only holds true when convenient – Pornhub is doing the exact opposite.

It’s asking a federal court in Alabama to order investigative reporter David Kenner and the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists not to report on court exhibits regarding Pornhub’s alleged hosting of child sexual abuse materials that had been ordered sealed but were made public for several months due to a docketing error.

We told All-Source Intelligence that, “There aren’t many First Amendment principles the Supreme Court has stated more clearly, or reiterated more often, than that the press cannot be punished for or censored from publishing government documents it obtained lawfully, even if they were released by mistake.” When litigants file motions seeking that forbidden relief anyway, judges should sanction their lawyers for violating Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which prohibits filings that lack a basis in fact or law.

Celebrate a transparency legend

Speaking of leaks: This weekend, as we do every year, we’re helping host Aaron Swartz Day, a hackathon in the name of the transparency advocate, champion of the open web, and creator of the prototype for SecureDrop, the open source whistleblower submission system that FPF still maintains today. You can join the hackathon and contribute to SecureDrop in person in San Francisco or online from anywhere in the world. Swartz’s life was cut tragically short, but he would have been 40 years old on Nov. 8. Our executive director, Trevor Timm, discussed Swartz’s legacy in a new video. Happy birthday, Aaron!

Fake journalism cop Brendan Carr wants to police polling

Last month, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr threatened the licenses of broadcasters who report on purported “fake polls,” accusing them of violating “basic journalistic ethics.” This week, we joined a coalition letter by TechFreedom reminding Carr that he’s misrepresenting the FCC’s authority and that the First Amendment stands between him and his coveted role of journalism police — a job he’s uniquely unqualified to take on. (Also, there’s still time to use our action center to urge the Senate to reject Carr’s handpicked choice for FCC commissioner.)