Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Journalism Press Freedom topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Senate unanimously passes reporter‑shield bill to protect sources, with exceptions

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

House Bill 158, creating statutory protections for journalists’ confidential sources and unpublished materials, passed the Senate 35‑0; sponsors said it extends protection to legacy and nontraditional news outlets while allowing limited exceptions for imminent harm or national security.

The Senate on March 18 unanimously approved House Bill 158, a measure sponsors described as the Protect Media Source Confidentiality Act. Floor sponsors said the law will allow reporters and qualifying news organizations — including freelance and independent digital outlets — to refuse compelled disclosure of confidential sources and unpublished newsgathering materials in most court proceedings.

Sponsor and floor debate explained the bill is modeled on protections enacted in other states and is designed to cover legacy newsrooms, independent outlets and freelance journalists who engage in news gathering and journalistic activities. The sponsor told senators the measure includes carve‑outs for cases involving imminent harm, national security, or other compelling public‑safety concerns.

Floor discussion also cited a split U.S. Supreme Court decision from 1972 as background: the sponsor said the First Amendment alone does not guarantee a reporter‑shield and that state statute fills the gap. The bill’s text exempts certain narrow categories where disclosure would be necessary for public safety or similar imperative reasons.

Senate roll call using a previous vote list recorded 35 ayes, none opposed. Supporters said the measure protects newsgathering, including nontraditional outlets, and reduces the chilling effect of court subpoenas; questions from colleagues focused on how the law defines journalistic activity and how it applies to independent and digital outlets. The sponsor and proponents said the bill’s language was intended to be inclusive of contemporary news practices.