Schadenfreude: Wishing Miller Ill, But What of Freedom of the Press?

Judith Miller said:

"I am extremely disappointed . . . Journalists simply cannot do their jobs without being able to commit to sources that they won't be identified. Such protection is critical to the free flow of information in a democracy."

Haha! We're laughing at the hack.

But you know what - she's right.

The protection of sources IS critical to the free flow of information in a democracy.

By letting the D. C. Court of Appeals' sweeping decision, a decision whch flatly states there is no reporters' privilege, either under the First Amendment or federal common law, the Supreme Court of the United States has abdicated its responsibility to set reasonable guidelines for the invocation of such a privilege.

Judge Tatel's concurrence to the DC Circuit majority opinion laid out reasonable and prudent guidelines for invocation of the privilege. The Supreme Court could have and should have taken the opportunity to adopt Tatel's reasoning as the law of the land.

Instead the extreme decision by Jesse Helms' favorite Judge David Sentelle now is the rule for federal government sources in Washington.

So while you enjoy your schadenfreude with regard to Miller, also consider the damage done to the freedom of the press.

A sad day.

Update [2005-6-27 15:46:12 by Armando]: DISCLOSURE. I represent Media clients in the First Amendment area, including on this issue specifically.