Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Press Freedom Shield Law topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board refers resolution supporting California shield law and resisting federal intervention to committee
Summary
Supervisors agreed to refer a resolution that would express support for the California shield law and resist federal intervention in an investigation stemming from a July protest. The board referred the matter to committee after brief remarks emphasizing press‑freedom concerns and the pending federal actions that prompted public comment.
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors on Aug. 1 voted to refer to committee a resolution expressing support for the California shield law and objecting to federal involvement in an investigation of a July protest. The board took no final action on the resolution at the meeting.
Supervisor McRaney spoke to the sensitivity of the topic and suggested committee referral so the board could more fully consider competing priorities: protecting press freedoms under the state constitution and evidence laws while ensuring appropriate criminal investigation of any injuries that occurred during demonstrations. “In light of the delicacy of this particular matter … I suggest that we submit this to committee,” McRaney said.
The item drew public comment from supporters of press protections, including the mother of jailed independent journalist Josh Wolf and representatives of civil liberties organizations. Ben Rosenthal of the National Lawyers Guild said federal actions risk turning journalists into “the unwitting, unwilling arm of the investigative power of the national police.” Richard Nee of the National Writers Union urged the board to endorse federal shield‑law proposals before Congress (he mentioned H.R. 3323 and S. 2831 by number) in addition to supporting California’s law.
Supervisor McRaney requested committee referral and the board agreed without objection; staff will refer the resolution for committee consideration. The referral leaves open further committee review of the matter and potential amendments before any formal board position would be adopted.
—Context: The item relates to a federal subpoena and contempt proceedings that have drawn public testimony and legal advocacy. The referral preserves time for fuller review; no committee date was announced during the meeting record.
