"How did it come to pass that an opposition's measure of a president's foreign policy was all or nothing, success or "failure"? The answer is that the political absolutism now normal in Washington arrived at the moment--Nov. 7, 2000--that our politics subordinated even a war against terror to seizing the office of the presidency." - Daniel Henninger - WSJ 11/18/05
"the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts." - George Orwell

Wednesday, August 02, 2006

US wins appeal to seek NY Times phone records

No grand jury can make an informed decision to pursue the investigation further, much less to indict or not indict, without the reporters' evidence. It is therefore not privileged - U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals
This is the latest in what Reuters describes as a "free speech battle."
The Times filed a lawsuit and successfully blocked a threatened subpoena being sought by Fitzgerald to seek the phone records of the two reporters after the newspaper refused to identify their sources.
However, the appeals court overturned that with a 2-1 ruling.

From Reuters:

The appeals court agreed a reporter's third party telephone records can be covered by the same privileges afforded to their personal records, but said the government had shown the information could not be obtained elsewhere.

The grand jury investigation's "serious law enforcement concerns" override a reporter's protection of privilege, the court said, and because the reporters' actions were central to the investigation, "there simply is no substitute for the evidence they have."

Gee, whoda thunk? Looks like there is a little sanity in the court sometimes. People tweak about that type of reaction, but how does one find leaks in a boat without looking? We're not talking "whistleblowers" here.


© blogger templates 3 column | Webtalks