Latest Breaking News

msanthrope

(37,549 posts)

28. You still haven't explained how a subpoena violates the first amendment. nt

Reply to JDPriestly (Reply #27)

Mon Jun 2, 2014, 12:00 PM

Jun 2014

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

51 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Supreme Court Rejects Appeal From Reporter Over Identity of Source [View all] DonViejo Jun 2014 OP

I know a federal shield law around isn't popular around here geek tragedy Jun 2014 #1

I am for a federal shield law for journalists. The problem is what has happened to the media in lostincalifornia Jun 2014 #2

^^THIS^^ plus you have Private Equity and Hedge funds buying media BumRushDaShow Jun 2014 #4

But how to define who is a journalist seveneyes Jun 2014 #18

Apparently the House passed such a law last week... DonViejo Jun 2014 #5

it was a funding restriction, not a per se ban geek tragedy Jun 2014 #6

We don't need a federal shield law. JDPriestly Jun 2014 #8

Yeah...but your 1st amendment rights don't trump the 6th amendment rights of my client. nt msanthrope Jun 2014 #9

The first amendment does not allow anyone to withhold relevant information geek tragedy Jun 2014 #10

"extend privileges to some" seveneyes Jun 2014 #19

okay so you favor the current system then? geek tragedy Jun 2014 #20

"Congress shall make no law . . . ." JDPriestly Jun 2014 #22

you still haven't said how a subpoena which requires the sharing geek tragedy Jun 2014 #26

I suspect that the interpretation of " abridging the freedom of speech' karynnj Jun 2014 #39

figures heaven05 Jun 2014 #3

Our current Supreme Court. What can I say? JDPriestly Jun 2014 #7

where does the first amendment say that citizens can refuse to cooperate geek tragedy Jun 2014 #11

When the subpoena violates the First Amendment, the First Amendment takes precedence. JDPriestly Jun 2014 #13

how can a subpoena violate the first amendment? nt geek tragedy Jun 2014 #15

If the subpoena requests information that is privileged under the First Amendment guarantee of JDPriestly Jun 2014 #32

Okay, so now you're back to "journalists" as opposed to regular citizens. geek tragedy Jun 2014 #40

How does such a subpoena violate the First Amendment? Adrahil Jun 2014 #23

I'm not comfortable with the fact that Risen published what he did, but JDPriestly Jun 2014 #33

So where do YOU draw the line... Adrahil Jun 2014 #43

The journalist does not have to answer a subpoena. JDPriestly Jun 2014 #47

Nixon tried it...... msanthrope Jun 2014 #14

See my post 33. JDPriestly Jun 2014 #34

Upholding Branzburg v. Hayes, from 1971. nt msanthrope Jun 2014 #12

The language of the First Amendment is very clear. JDPriestly Jun 2014 #16

And the 1st doesn't trump the 6th. nt msanthrope Jun 2014 #17

Oh yes. It does. JDPriestly Jun 2014 #27

You still haven't explained how a subpoena violates the first amendment. nt msanthrope Jun 2014 #28

How does a subpoena violate a privilege or a different law? JDPriestly Jun 2014 #35

You are mixing apples and oranges. This is a subpoena in a criminal matter for msanthrope Jun 2014 #42

Risen isn't charged with violating the law by obtaining or publishing the information onenote Jun 2014 #44

Yes. I am saying that we do not have a free press unless those who publish can obtain JDPriestly Jun 2014 #46

The constitution has never been interpreted to create the right you claim is necessary onenote Jun 2014 #50

That is because we live in a "security state" that is on its way to fascism. JDPriestly Jun 2014 #51

so the problem is that all three branches of government disagree geek tragedy Jun 2014 #21

Slavery was something that was pretty well accepted in the US for a long time. JDPriestly Jun 2014 #24

or maybe those who disagree with you have a point. geek tragedy Jun 2014 #25

I explained very clearly in what I think is Post No. 33. JDPriestly Jun 2014 #36

the problem is that in doing so you explicitly used the rationale geek tragedy Jun 2014 #41

In this day and age, we are all publishing news and opinion and are entitled to the protection JDPriestly Jun 2014 #48

So you would essentially ban all subpoenas geek tragedy Jun 2014 #49

Your certainty is belied by the historical record onenote Jun 2014 #31

Let's see. JDPriestly Jun 2014 #37

Is this a case where the government is blocking Risen from publishing? onenote Jun 2014 #38

Valerie Plame bpj62 Jun 2014 #29

Based on a quick read of the brief Blue_Tires Jun 2014 #30

Another illegitimacy noted. DeSwiss Jun 2014 #45