Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Media Law topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panel agrees to print bill establishing reporter-source protections; lawmakers flag questions about who qualifies as a journalist
Summary
Representatives introduced RS 32,170 to extend statutory source-protection to those engaged in journalistic activities; sponsors and members said the proposal mirrors language used in other states but committee members asked for hearings to clarify who qualifies as a journalist and how the law would interact with defamation suits and subpoenas.
Representative Marco Erickson introduced RS 32,170, a draft statute intended to strengthen legal protections for journalists who promise confidentiality to sources. Erickson said the text is modeled on language adopted in other states and aims to protect small news outlets and independent journalists who may lack legal resources when subpoenaed.
Erickson described the intent as narrow, with exceptions for national-security matters and imminent physical harm. "This gives [sources] a little bit stronger protection... we're 1 of 10 states that don't have this type of language in the current law," Erickson said.
Committee members asked a series of substantive questions. Representative Mathias raised whether operators of websites or blogs that resemble news outlets would be covered; Erickson replied that the draft ties protection to "regular journalistic activities" and said the committee could call witnesses to clarify definitional boundaries. Representative Hawkins asked the sponsor to provide guidance at the hearing on what constitutes a "legitimate" news outlet, noting that no licensing exists for news publishers. Representative Gannon asked how the shield would operate in defamation lawsuits; Erickson said he would consult subject-matter experts and legal counsel to clarify interactions with existing law.
A motion to introduce RS 32,170 was made and carried unanimously. The sponsor and multiple committee members said they would bring witnesses and experts for the public hearing to address definitional and legal questions, including the application of the First Amendment and how other states' statutes—one member cited Idaho—have been applied.
Votes at the committee introduction: Motion to introduce RS 32,170 — moved by Representative Mathias; outcome: motion carried unanimously (vote counts not specified in the transcript).
