UPDATED: 8:00 pm – SCOTUS TO NYTimes: “You are not above the law.” Scroll…
Treasoners from the NYTimes who have been accused by federal prosecutors of tipping off Islamic charities fronting for terror, want Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to protect them:
The New York Times asked the Supreme Court yesterday to bar a federal prosecutor from reviewing the phone records of two of its reporters. The records, lawyers for The Times said, would allow the government to learn the identities of many of the reporters’ confidential sources.
Gasp! No! Why, that could lead to a conviction! We can’t have that.
The case arose from a Chicago grand jury’s investigation into who told the two reporters, Judith Miller and Philip Shenon, about actions the government was planning to take in 2001 against two Islamic charities. The United States attorney in Chicago, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, sought the reporters’ records directly from their phone companies, and The Times filed suit to stop him.
In August, a divided three-judge panel of the federal appeals court in Manhattan ruled in favor of Mr. Fitzgerald, saying the reporters were not entitled to shield their sources. The needs of law enforcement, the majority said, outweighed any protections the reporters might have in the First Amendment or other areas of law.
You would think this would be pretty obvious.
Ms. Miller left the paper last year after spending 85 days in jail in connection with a separate leak investigation, also supervised by Mr. Fitzgerald.
If she’s guilty for one leak, it makes sense that she probably leaked…
Michelle Malkin is on top of things:
The NYTimes’ refusal to cooperate with the feds to find illegal leakers in these counterterrorism cases deserves to be on the front page.
This is a lame and deploreable excuse in my eyes, but many were eager to buy it. Now, to actually leak information out to the enemies to warn them is nothing more than taking sides against our public interest in the war on terror.
UPDATED: 8:00 pm – SCOTUS TO NYTimes: “You are not above the law.”
The government says that the fact that the reporters relayed disclosures from a government source to “targets of an imminent law enforcement action substantially weakens any claim of freedom of the press.”
Michelle Malkin: “Message to blabbermouths: You are not above the law, no matter how ostentatiously you wrap yourselves in the First Amendment.”
Jay Stephenson: “One can only hope that this ruling will make the NY Times and other MSM sources think twice before revealing classified information and tipping off terror-funding front groups.”