Las Vegas Sun

June 4, 2012

Currently: 97° | Complete forecast | Log in

Sun editorial:

A federal shield law

Senate should pass bill to give journalists needed ability to keep sources confidential

Thursday, Sept. 17, 2009 | 2:05 a.m.

The Senate Judiciary Committee today is scheduled to hold a hearing on a bill that would create a shield law that would allow journalists some protection to keep their sources confidential.

Federal law currently allows prosecutors to compel journalists to turn over confidential information and the names of their sources. That poses a serious problem for the media in its role as a government watchdog.

Sources often share sensitive information, including details of government corruption, based on a pledge of confidentiality. If a prosecutor can, simply on a whim, force a journalist to break that pledge, vital information might never get to the public, weakening the public’s right to know about what’s going on in government.

In supporting the bill, called the Free Flow of Information Act, the House Judiciary Committee noted that “many stories would not have been published without a promise of confidentiality of sources,” citing Watergate, Iran-Contra and the Abu Ghraib prison scandals.

The House bill, however, does not give journalists a complete right to keep sources and information confidential. It tries to strike a balance between journalists’ need to protect their sources and the government’s responsibility to protect the public.

In the House Judiciary Committee’s words, the bill would prevent law enforcement from using journalists as “a shortcut to a proper investigation.” At the same time, it would give federal courts the ability to order journalists to turn information over in certain circumstances, including when there is an imminent terrorist threat.

The bill faces a tough fight in the Senate, where a similar bill died in 2007 despite winning bipartisan support in the House. The bills’ critics, who are largely Republican, say the legislation weakens the nation’s security and say there is “no precedent” for it in American history.

Those critics, however, ignore the 49 states, including Nevada, and the District of Columbia, that have enacted similar laws. Those laws have been effective and have not shown any adverse effect on public safety.

This is a good bill. The Senate should pass it.

Discussion: comments so far…

Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.

Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.

No trusted comments have been posted.

Post a comment

Commenting requires registration.

Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy.

If you would like to submit your comment as a letter to the editor, you may submit it here.

Most Popular