Related Research Articles
Contempt of court, often referred to simply as "contempt", is the offense of being disobedient to or disrespectful toward a court of law and its officers in the form of behavior that opposes or defies the authority, justice and dignity of the court. A similar attitude towards a legislative body is termed contempt of Parliament or contempt of Congress. The verb for "to commit contempt" is contemn and a person guilty of this is a contemnor.
A shield law is legislation designed to protect reporters' privilege. This privilege involves the right of news reporters to refuse to testify as to information and/or sources of information obtained during the news gathering and dissemination process. Currently the U.S. federal government has not enacted any national shield laws, but most of the 50 states do have shield laws or other protections for reporters in place.
Parliamentary privilege is a legal immunity enjoyed by members of certain legislatures, in which legislators are granted protection against civil or criminal liability for actions done or statements made in the course of their legislative duties. It is common in countries whose constitutions are based on the Westminster system.
Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665 (1972), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court invalidating the use of the First Amendment as a defense for reporters summoned to testify before a grand jury. The case was argued February 23, 1972 and decided June 29 of the same year. The reporters lost their case by a vote of 5-4. This case is cited for the rule that in federal courts, a reporter may not generally avoid testifying in a criminal grand jury, and it remains the only case in which the U.S. Supreme Court has considered the use of reporters' privilege.
Incorporation, in United States law, is the doctrine by which portions of the Bill of Rights have been made applicable to the states. When the Bill of Rights was ratified, the courts held that its protections extended only to the actions of the federal government and that the Bill of Rights did not place limitations on the authority of the state and local governments. However, the post-Civil War era, beginning in 1865 with the Thirteenth Amendment, which declared the abolition of slavery, gave rise to the incorporation of other Amendments, applying more rights to the states and people over time. Gradually, various portions of the Bill of Rights have been held to be applicable to the state and local governments by incorporation through the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868 and the Fifteenth Amendment in 1870.
Apple v. Does was a high-profile legal proceeding in United States of America notable for bringing into question the breadth of the shield law protecting journalists from being forced to reveal their sources, and whether that law applied to online news journalists writing about corporate trade secrets. The case was also notable for the large collection of amici curiae who joined in the matter.
In law, sub judice, Latin for "under a judge", means that a particular case or matter is under trial or being considered by a judge or court. The term may be used synonymously with "the present case" or "the case at bar" by some lawyers.
Freedom of the press in the United States is legally protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Reporter's privilege in the United States, is a "reporter's protection under constitutional or statutory law, from being compelled to testify about confidential information or sources." It may be described in the US as the qualified (limited) First Amendment or statutory right many jurisdictions have given to journalists in protecting their confidential sources from discovery.
Source protection, sometimes also referred to as source confidentiality or in the U.S. as the reporter's privilege, is a right accorded to journalists under the laws of many countries, as well as under international law. It prohibits authorities, including the courts, from compelling a journalist to reveal the identity of an anonymous source for a story. The right is based on a recognition that without a strong guarantee of anonymity, many would be deterred from coming forward and sharing information of public interests with journalists.
The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution addresses criminal procedure and other aspects of the Constitution. It was ratified, along with nine other articles, in 1791 as part of the Bill of Rights. The Fifth Amendment applies to every level of the government, including the federal, state, and local levels, in regard to a US citizen or resident of the US. The Supreme Court furthered the protections of this amendment through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
In Australia, legal professional privilege is a rule of law protecting communications between legal practitioners and their clients from disclosure under compulsion of court or statute. While the rule of legal professional privilege in Australia largely mirrors that of other Commonwealth jurisdictions, there are a number of notable qualifications and modifications to the privilege specific to Australia and its states, and contentious issues about the direction of the privilege.
The Constitution of India provides the right of freedom, given in article 19 with the view of guaranteeing individual rights that were considered vital by the framers of the constitution. The right to freedom in Article 19 guarantees the freedom of speech and expression, as one of its six freedoms.
The Free Flow of Information Act is a bill intended to provide a news reporter with the right to refuse to testify as to information or sources of information obtained during the newsgathering and dissemination process.
Myron A. Farber is an American newspaper reporter for The New York Times, whose investigations into the deaths of several patients at an Oradell, New Jersey, hospital led to the murder trial of Dr. Mario Jascalevich, a physician at the hospital who was alleged to have used a powerful muscle relaxant in what became known as the "Dr. X" case. After refusing to turn over notes from his investigation in response to a subpoena from the defense attorney in the case, Farber was jailed for contempt and the newspaper fined, ending up spending 40 days in jail with fines of $285,000 assessed. Appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States, the case set a precedent for the limitations of shield laws in the United States.
The California Shield Law provides statutory and constitutional protections to journalists seeking to maintain the confidentiality of an unnamed source or unpublished information obtained during newsgathering. The shield law is currently codified in Article I, section 2(b) of the California Constitution and section 1070 of the Evidence Code. Section 1986.1 of the California Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) supplements these principal shield law provisions by providing additional safeguards to a reporter whose records are being subpoenaed.
Internet censorship in South Africa is a developing topic.
Obsidian Finance Group, LLC v. Cox is a 2011 case from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon concerning online defamation. Plaintiffs Obsidian Finance Group and its co-founder Kevin Padrick sued Crystal Cox for maintaining several blogs that accused Obsidian and Padrick of corrupt and fraudulent conduct. The court dismissed most of Cox's blog posts as opinion, but found one single post to be more factual in its assertions and therefore defamatory. For that post, the court awarded the plaintiffs $2.5 million in damages. This case is notable for the court's ruling that Cox, as an internet blogger, was not a journalist and was thus not protected by Oregon's media shield laws, although the court later clarified that its ruling did not categorically exclude blogs from being considered media and indicated that its decision was based in part upon Cox offering to remove negative posts for a $2,500 fee. In January 2014 the Ninth Circuit Court affirmed in part and reversed in part the district court's judgment awarding compensatory damages to the bankruptcy trustee. It also ordered a new trial on the blog post at issue.
Gerard McManus is an Australian journalist, magazine columnist and media consultant.
The imprisonment of Roger Shuler was an event in United States jurisprudence in 2013–2014 which attracted some notice both nationally and internationally for its application of prior restraint and of imprisonment for defamation, both unusual under American law. Shuler was held for five months by the State of Alabama.
References
- ↑ R v McManus and Harvey [2007]VCC 619 (PDF), archived from the original (PDF) on 12 July 2009 (27 June 2007), County Court (Victoria)
- ↑ "Evidence Amendment (Journalists' Privilege) Bill 2011".
- ↑ Dixon, Nicolee. "The Pivotal Case of R v McManus and Harvey" (PDF). Shield Laws for Journalists. Queensland Parliamentary Library and Research Service.
- ↑ Michael Harvey; Gerard McManus (20 February 2004). "Cabinet's $500m rebuff revealed" (PDF). Herald Sun. p. 3.
- ↑ "Media Alliance Code of Ethics". Media, Entertainment & Arts Alliance.
- ↑ R v Kelly [2006] VSCA 221 (17 October 2006), Court of Appeal (Victoria).
- ↑ "Bureaucrat's conviction for leaking info overturned". ABC News. 17 October 2006.
- ↑ "The Queen v Desmond Kelly (Transcript of Proceedings)" (PDF). 23 August 2005. p. 89.
Bearing in mind the nature of this proceeding there would be a range of penalties available, but I think no one should be under any misapprehension that prison is one of them.
- ↑ Hartigan, John (24 March 2009). "Australia's Right to Know" (PDF). Speech at Freedom of Speech Conference.
- ↑ Ester, Helen (2007). Clive Hamilton; Sarah Maddison (eds.). Silencing Dissent. Allen & Unwin.
Federal Secretary of the Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA) Chris Warren described the charging of McManus and Harvey as 'a train wreck waiting to happen'.
- ↑ "Breaking the shackles the continuing fight against censorship and spin" (PDF). 2008 report into the state of press freedom in Australia. The Media, Entertainment & Arts Alliance. 2008.
- ↑ Australian Press Council (11 January 2010). "Submission to Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee - Inquiry into the Evidence Amendment (Journalists' Privilege) Bill 2010 (No. 1 and No.2)".
- ↑ Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs (May 2009). "Parliamentary Inquiry into the Evidence Amendment (Journalists' Privilege) Bill 2009".
- ↑ Dixon, Nicolee (February 2012). "Shield Laws for Journalists" (PDF). Research Brief 2012/No.03. Queensland Parliamentary Library and Research Service.
- ↑ Evidence Amendment (Journalists' Privilege) Act 2011 (Cth).
- ↑ Merritt, Chris (29 April 2011). "Another state decides against shield laws to protect bloggers: the new media faces a fresh legal rebuff". The Australian.