Seems like every week I’m reading another story of the rights of photojournalists getting stomped on. Today, no exception. In this Virginia case, the cops seized unpublished photos from the James Madison University newspaper using a search warrant that violates journalist’s privilege under the First Amendment, the Virginia Constitution and common law.
“The settlement ends a month-and-a-half long debate over the photos, which began when someone from the prosecutor’s office called the student newspaper a few days after the riot and asked for copies of unpublished photos. The Breeze staff declined to do so, citing the journalist’s privilege under the First Amendment, the Virginia Constitution and common law, according to the settlement. The prosecutor’s office also contacted the university’s director of judicial affairs and general counsel, who declined to intervene, according to Garst’s statement. The next day, Garst received a search warrant for “all electronic devices” that are “on the premises or possessed or owned or leased or used by ‘The Breeze’ or by any of its employees, agents or members,” so they could obtain photos, videos or other images recorded that weekend, according to a copy of the warrant. Garst and a number of plainclothes officers then executed the warrant…” -Washington Post
Turns out that somebody at the prosecutors office realized this was a no-no. The Washington Post reports further that, “In a statement Garst apologized ‘for the fear and concern that I caused the Breeze and its staff. The discussions that have occurred have enhanced my understanding and re-enforced the role of a free press in our democracy.’ Garst said that in the future, when seeking information and documents from news organizations, including student media, she will do so through the subpoena process.”
Imagine that. The legal way. Read more here.
(via The Washington Post. Thanks @nelsonhd)
Only wanna input that you have a very decent website , I enjoy the layout it actually stands out.
eminent domain cannot be used to violate the constitution. When they take your house the constitution is what is forcing the govt to compensate the poor bastard that got screwed.
You have to defend all the rights, even those you personally dislike for what ever reason, lest you risk losing all of your rights.
Mike Glenn
US Army OIF 2004-2005
And the nanny state grows…
http://gizmodo.com/5553765/are-cameras-the-new-guns
Perhaps the editors of the student paper were refusing to just turn over the pictures for a slightly different reason. Maybe they were refusing so that the prosecutor had to justify why to the court and follow the subpoena process. This is perhaps what the editor of any commercial newspaper would also do and hence what they are taught to do in college? No need for seizure just follow the rules and if the courts agree and the lawyers agree then you get your photos and we all go about doing our jobs. If the newspaper staff didn’t do that then perhaps in the future when it did matter and they needed a source to reveal information to them that source would not because they believed (with good reason) that the newspaper staff would just roll over and reveal their source – which I think there are more than a few examples of newspapers not doing to great fanfare and which have helped establish the important role the press plays today.
Were they being punks. I don’t see it that way.
Were they being anti-establishment? Aren’t supposed to be? They are in college – they need to learn to question everything in order to figure out where they actually stand.
And just because GWB expanded the power of the government to seize assets via his executive order only means that people on both sides of the isle ought to be running straight to their elected representatives and urging them to get that order overturned either by the current President or by legislative action.
Oops. Forgot to attach my name to the anonymous post above.