General Discussion

msanthrope

(37,549 posts)

112. If you don't reargue the decision, you never get it overturned. So yeah..you start with Branzenburg

Tue Jul 23, 2013, 06:55 PM

Jul 2013

1. Stewart is prophetic because he noted that the privilege would be difficult to administer. How does one not grant this privilege to anyone who merely starts a blog? Risen is a reporter of note, but at what level of reportage does the privilege end?

This is not an impossible task, but isn't it best done by statute rather than a judicially-created remedy to a fix a problem that hasn't been proven to exist?

2. Absent a showing that the press is actually inhibited from publication, how does one prove a need for a privilege necessary to override the needs of the grand jury? Until you do that, the prerogatives of the grand jury under the 5th will always overide an unproven First amendment claim. Always.

You are looking for an overrule. It's legislation of a reporter's shield that will fix this.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

113 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Obama�s Escalating War on Freedom of the Press [View all] xchrom Jul 2013 OP

Just tidying up MannyGoldstein Jul 2013 #1

This has been the law since 1972. It's what put Judith Miller in the can. msanthrope Jul 2013 #7

Perhaps you can furnish us with a graph of MannyGoldstein Jul 2013 #9

Again..what's the constitutional argument you would make that puts Judith msanthrope Jul 2013 #11

What compels this President to prosecute more reporters than all other modern Presidents combined? MannyGoldstein Jul 2013 #25

A subpeona is not a prosecution, and it's hyperbole to suggest so. msanthrope Jul 2013 #29

Perhaps you can furnish us with the graph of press prosecutions/year. I like graphs. eom Blanks Jul 2013 #17

I like graphs, too!!! nt msanthrope Jul 2013 #24

I couldn't find any graphs, but here is an explanation. Blanks Jul 2013 #49

That's funny. woo me with science Jul 2013 #77

That dodge was so big it must have snooper2 Jul 2013 #60

Not sure what you are trying to prove . . . hueymahl Jul 2013 #65

Wow...and awesome response it was too. zeemike Jul 2013 #70

I agree. bvar22 Jul 2013 #74

First, welcome to DU. Lots of us can do calculus. msanthrope Jul 2013 #71

Thanks for the welcome hueymahl Jul 2013 #81

That's a lot of throat clearing and a lack of analysis of the 5th amendment msanthrope Jul 2013 #95

I honestly am not sure how to respond to that comment hueymahl Jul 2013 #103

Huey--I can tell that you are not a criminal defense attorney. msanthrope Jul 2013 #104

Maybe we are talking past each other hueymahl Jul 2013 #105

We aren't talking past each other. You simply refuse to address the Branzburg msanthrope Jul 2013 #108

Ok, that helps me understand where you are coming from hueymahl Jul 2013 #109

If you don't reargue the decision, you never get it overturned. So yeah..you start with Branzenburg msanthrope Jul 2013 #112

Thank you hueymahl Jul 2013 #113

Excellent response! Le Taz Hot Jul 2013 #87

Huey, that was superb... Oilwellian Jul 2013 #101

PLUS ONE! nt Enthusiast Jul 2013 #107

Nothing surprises me anymore newfie11 Jul 2013 #2

You are being mislead. Whisp Jul 2013 #15

How do you know it is not YOU who are being "misled"? bvar22 Jul 2013 #75

There are a lot of things wrong. Whisp Jul 2013 #80

And do you join with the others who shout "Racist" at those who believe... bvar22 Jul 2013 #94

I'm not understanding something here. Whisp Jul 2013 #96

No. I believe he was too accommodating to the Racists AFTER the verdict was handed down bvar22 Jul 2013 #97

I thought the speech was excellent. Whisp Jul 2013 #102

He'll just give a speech about the importance of the freedom of the press. The Link Jul 2013 #3

That's the way it works. LuvNewcastle Jul 2013 #6

Nice. Well, Ari did tell people to "Watch what you say." Pholus Jul 2013 #4

Important post. woo me with science Jul 2013 #93

Your OP source is either profoundly ignorant, or thinks his readers are. msanthrope Jul 2013 #5

Freedom of the press and protecting whistleblowers was not on the table geek tragedy Jul 2013 #8

I'm waiting for all the 'civil libertarians' to explain to me why a reporter msanthrope Jul 2013 #10

Obama also created a secret court, don't ya know ... JoePhilly Jul 2013 #12

The Presidential Time Machine has been busy. After going back to Hawaii in 1961 to plant msanthrope Jul 2013 #13

LOL ... I forgot about how Obama's COLA formula prevented increases JoePhilly Jul 2013 #14

You know, I just have to share that thread... msanthrope Jul 2013 #23

YUP ... looks familiar. JoePhilly Jul 2013 #27

Not to mention planting his birth announcement in a Hawaii newspaper AllINeedIsCoffee Jul 2013 #36

I'm reading this like reporters have immunity to the laws everyone else has to hold to. Whisp Jul 2013 #16

Risen is claiming that he should not have to testify in a criminal proceeding. msanthrope Jul 2013 #21

ok, thanks for clearing that up. Whisp Jul 2013 #40

Nailed it...nt SidDithers Jul 2013 #18

BAM! AllINeedIsCoffee Jul 2013 #35

+1 Johonny Jul 2013 #39

+1 uponit7771 Jul 2013 #52

+1 nt Progressive dog Jul 2013 #58

+1 n/t tammywammy Jul 2013 #62

it is moving to see a Democratic Administration taking the lead in expanding the surveillance state Douglas Carpenter Jul 2013 #19

From 1972? The SCOTUS ruled in 1972 that a reporter could not evade a criminal subpoena. msanthrope Jul 2013 #22

amen! as long as we can keep prosecuting more and more people under the espenonage act Douglas Carpenter Jul 2013 #26

So, 8 people = "more and more people" ?? JoePhilly Jul 2013 #30

as long as we are increasing the crackdown we have reason to celebrate Douglas Carpenter Jul 2013 #31

I love the hyperbole of ... "the surveillance state" ... sounds scary. JoePhilly Jul 2013 #33

well there are some real nuts out there who seem to think we do - like this goofy couple: Douglas Carpenter Jul 2013 #37

Given what Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson went through, I don't blame them JoePhilly Jul 2013 #55

Mr. Risen isn't being charged with espionage...or anything else. He has msanthrope Jul 2013 #32

as long as they are vigilant in cracking down on leaks of all sorts using whatever mechanisms they Douglas Carpenter Jul 2013 #34

Mr. Sterling leaked details of our attempts to stop the Iranians from msanthrope Jul 2013 #41

you're right! It's nobodies business excepts the governments and they know what's best Douglas Carpenter Jul 2013 #43

On this particular point---nuclear interdiction of Iran--I'm going to msanthrope Jul 2013 #46

I'm sure the Iranians were shocked to learn that the U.S. is trying to keep them from getting Douglas Carpenter Jul 2013 #48

Again..what was the purpose of revealing the details of Operation Merlin? msanthrope Jul 2013 #59

there is a difference between protecting the sources of journalist - and agreeing with the actions Douglas Carpenter Jul 2013 #61

What about the rights of the accused under the 5th and 6th amendments? msanthrope Jul 2013 #72

if the accused asks the journalist who they revealed informaiton to to come forward - that would be Douglas Carpenter Jul 2013 #73

But what if the accused isn't the source? nt msanthrope Jul 2013 #79

+1 uponit7771 Jul 2013 #53

K & R !!! WillyT Jul 2013 #20

link to trevor timm's comments xchrom Jul 2013 #28

Marcy Wheeler??? I'm sure emptywheel, who liveblogged from the Scooter msanthrope Jul 2013 #38

Democratic President+spying= good! republican+spying=bad Safetykitten Jul 2013 #42

BINGO! We have a WINNA! RC Jul 2013 #51

What spying?? This case has to do with a fired CIA employee leaking msanthrope Jul 2013 #66

WRONG and yet another attempted misdirection hueymahl Jul 2013 #68

+1 leftstreet Jul 2013 #90

+1 woo me with science Jul 2013 #92

"...a criminal trial." xtraxritical Jul 2013 #44

After seeing all the hate vented against our remaining Constitutional rights, Waiting For Everyman Jul 2013 #45

no, I think they are authoritarianisms useful dingbats for free - out of blind partisanship Douglas Carpenter Jul 2013 #47

^^^this^^^ L0oniX Jul 2013 #50

Odd association, money and power. Octafish Jul 2013 #54

Some must be. limpyhobbler Jul 2013 #56

time stamps Ichingcarpenter Jul 2013 #63

we know from wikileaks questionseverything Jul 2013 #89

Read the case treestar Jul 2013 #83

Fucking ridiculous. blackspade Jul 2013 #57

Quick! Who wrote that article! Bonobo Jul 2013 #64

This is a COURT CASE treestar Jul 2013 #67

Court upholds existing laws, President is to blame. Progressive dog Jul 2013 #69

Huge K&R, and exactly how important this is to the One Percent woo me with science Jul 2013 #76

Not the only freedom under attack. n/t Skip Intro Jul 2013 #78

Kick. This is important. woo me with science Jul 2013 #82

Sorry, but you lost all credibility jazzimov Jul 2013 #84

Speak for yourself usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jul 2013 #99

It's a cottage industry on DU. randome Jul 2013 #100

Kick. Important. woo me with science Jul 2013 #85

whistleblowers denied bail questionseverything Jul 2013 #86

... questionseverything Jul 2013 #88

Thank you. Ellsberg was released on bond the same day. woo me with science Jul 2013 #91

K&R forestpath Jul 2013 #98

if they can go after journalists and medical marijuana patients why can't they go after liberal_at_heart Jul 2013 #106

Any Democrat that approves of the Administration's spying and further disrespect of the constitution AZ Progressive Jul 2013 #110

Obama Further Violates his Oath to Defend the Constitution AZ Progressive Jul 2013 #111