An e-mail sent out by the First Amendment Project
California, like many states, has a law that prevents search warrants being issued against journalists. These laws were mostly passed in the wake of a 1978 Supreme Court opinion in which the Court found that the First Amendment does not prevent a search warrant from being executed against a journalist, states were free to grant journalists such right by statute. The federal government passed its own version of the law as well, the Privacy Protection Act of 1980.
Why offer journalists this protection? The answer is simple: Journalists cannot do their job of informing the public if those who they are covering believe that the journalist is gathering information that will be readily available to law enforcement.
In December of 2009, David Morse, a respected and veteran independent photojournalist was arrested while covering the student protests at the Chancellor’s House on the UC Berkeley campus. The details of his arrest are a story in its own — perhaps we’ll cover that in a future email update — but what is most important now is that as he was being detained and ultimately arrested, he identified himself as a journalist to the UC police officers no less than 6 times, repeatedly offered to show his press credentials and did after several hours get a commanding officer to look at his press credential. Nevertheless, Morse was arrested and his camera was seized as evidence pursuant to his arrest.
The charges against Morse were ultimately dropped. But while he was still in custody, the police obtained a search warrant that enabled them to view the photographs on his memory cards.
The search warrant affidavit — which is essentially the application for the warrant the police present to the judge — made no mention of Morse being or even claiming to be a journalist.
First Amendment Project is representing Morse. Just last Friday, we filed on Morse’s behalf a motion to quash the search warrant and have Morse’s memory cards and photographs returned to him. A hearing is scheduled for May 11.
FIRST AMENDMENT PROJECT remains the only nonprofit organization in the country dedicated to providing free legal services exclusively on free speech and free press issues. We’ve been really busy and hope to have more updates on our work out to you soon.
News: Lawsuits, CA Democracy Act not on 2010 ballot and more
UC Printing Services Set to Close
UC to pay group’s legal fees in stadium lawsuit
California Public Employee Retirement System Pension Funds – Could they go …
Chief Executive Roundtable chair named alumni regent
No loans! Major colleges pledge aid without debt
Settlement clears way for Berkeley stadium update
California Public Employee Retirement System Pension Funds – Could they go …
UC to pay group’s legal fees in stadium lawsuit
Bump in revenues might help schools more than state budget
Protests prove costly to campus
Analysis: Recent California newspaper editorials
McCOURT v. REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
THE REGENTS OF UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES…
California Democracy Act Fails to Collect Enough Signatures for November Ballot
UC Berkeley, neighbors settle stadium lawsuit
How a Republican Accounting Trick Is Destroying Unions, Pensions, and Public … (blog/opinion)
UC’s Yudof wants to know more about Chamber of Commerce’s anti-Brown ad … (blog/opinion)
Pauley Pavilion: UCLA responds
UCLA has decided against using $15 million in student fees that students voted to spend on renovating two campus buildings (not Pauley Pavilion.) Read about the decision here: UCLA diverts student fees from Pauley Pavilion renovation. Read the earlier article that stated UCLA would put the $15 million here: State universities tap student fees for unintended projects.
I still have a few questions:
- Is the controversy over spending student fees on construction, period, or is the controversy over spending fees students voted to spend on construction other than renovating Pauley Pavilion?
- The later article states that how the $15 million will be used has not been decided. Why is that money not going toward the purpose voted on?
- Was it lawful for UCLA to plan on using the $15 million for a purpose other than what was voted on?
News: Pensions, Endowed positions, Statewide Accounting Curric, UCSD hospitals well-ranked
News: Retirement benefits, UC Berkeley student suspensions, Budget cuts to sports, Student loan reform
Task force considers options for retirement benefits
UC Berkeley Student Protesters Face Seven-Month Suspension
UC Davis students call attention to possible budget cuts to sports
Over 100 protest-related suspensions at UC Berkeley? (blog post)
Editorial: New loan reform will benefit college students (Opinion)
leave a comment