Last year, U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin announced his support of the PRESS Act in the Sun-Times. Durbin wrote that “at a time when the former president is calling for journalists to be jailed and referring to the press as the ‘enemy of the people,’ it’s critical that we protect this pillar of our democracy.”
The PRESS Act is the strongest federal shield bill for journalists we’ve ever seen. It protects journalists — regardless of their political leanings or establishment credentials — from being surveilled by the government or forced to burn their sources, except in serious emergencies.
SEND LETTERS TO: letters@suntimes.com. We want to hear from our readers. To be considered for publication, letters must include your full name, your neighborhood or hometown and a phone number for verification purposes. Letters should be a maximum of approximately 375 words.
It also restricts workaround efforts to spy on journalists through their technology providers. These protections are crucial so that sources can help reporters expose government and corporate crimes without risking their careers or freedom.
The PRESS Act didn’t pass last year, despite strong bipartisan support, because of a nonsensical objection from a single senator. But Durbin followed through on his commitment and co-sponsored this year’s newly reintroduced PRESS Act. He’s joined by U.S. Sens. Ron Wyden and Mike Lee and U.S. Reps. Jamie Raskin and Kevin Kiley. They should all be commended for protecting First Amendment rights when so many politicians fear them.
Journalists should not have to choose between burning their source and going to prison. And that choice isn’t hypothetical. Journalists have served time for refusing to identify sources for stories on everything from CIA scandals to murder cases to steroids in baseball. It’s among the reasons why experts say press freedom in the United States is on the decline.
When sources are afraid to come forward, journalists can’t speak truth to power. Corruption goes unchecked, and citizens are less informed. We must do everything we can to make the PRESS Act the law if we want to have a free press that makes democracy possible.
Judge Murray Gurfein put it best in upholding the press’s right to publish the Pentagon Papers: “A cantankerous press, an obstinate press, a ubiquitous press must be suffered by those in authority in order to preserve the even greater values of freedom of expression and the right of the people to know.”
John Cusack, founding board member, Freedom of the Press Foundation
Seth Stern, director of advocacy, Freedom of the Press Foundation
Supreme Court’s decision damages wall between church and state
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of a web designer (not yet doing business) who, under the guise of free speech, wanted to use her religious beliefs preemptively to justify discrimination against same-sex couples.
The court found, in the free speech clause and the free exercise clause of the First Amendment, a new right, unknown to the founders and not explicit in the text, to discriminate against a minority using religious belief as the justification.
The First Amendment says in part, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof …” Now the Supreme Court believes it can establish religion whenever the “free exercise thereof” discriminates against LGBTQ+ people.
When the Supreme Court imposed the religious beliefs of one person on a minority, another brick was removed from the wall of separation between church and state.
Bob Barth, Edgewater
