Inspired in part by Jim Taricani's conviction, Sen. Christopher Dodd introduces a bill backing First Amendment rights, although its passage may face long odds.

01:41 AM EST on Saturday, November 20, 2004

BY JOHN E. MULLIGAN
Journal Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON -- Spurred by the case of Rhode Island newsman Jim Taricani and other judicial efforts to expose reporters' confidential sources, Sen. Christopher J. Dodd proposed a journalism shield law yesterday that would cover the federal court system.

Dodd said he acted to shore up the First Amendment "right of all Americans to not only speak freely but also to freely receive" news gathered from confidential sources. Dodd said he was prompted in part by Thursday's conviction of Taricani, an investigative reporter for Channel 10 (WJAR-TV), in U.S. District Court in Providence.

"What was his crime?" Dodd asked rhetorically during an afternoon news conference in the Capitol. "He did his job."

But the Connecticut Democrat acknowledged that the bill he introduced yesterday -- which has no co-sponsors in either political party -- is doomed for this Congress, which will probably end with the Senate's recess today. Dodd also conceded that it will be a challenge to enact a national shield law in the 109th Congress, which opens in January.

Dodd portrayed his measure, modeled after a shield law in the District of Columbia, more as a protection of citizens' access to freely flowing news and information than as a special safeguard for the practice of journalism.

Dodd said he is promoting the bill so that "no one can be hauled into jail just because they talked to a reporter." Shield laws exist, he noted, in more than 30 states, including several conservative Southern and Western states.

But Dodd also expressed concern for Taricani and for several Washington-based journalists who are under pressure to reveal sources in the case of a CIA operative whose identity was leaked to a newspaper columnist.

Dodd's action will have no effect on Taricani, who is to be sentenced on Dec. 9. But Dodd said he wanted to serve notice that there will be a strenuous effort to enact a federal shield law during the new Congress.

Lucy Dalglish, executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, said Dodd's measure will serve as "a place-setter" for a sustained campaign for a federal shield law to begin in January. Dalglish said enactment of a federal shield law will be difficult, even if the news media can avoid the squabbling that hobbled efforts a generation ago to shore up protections for journalistic sources.

"To be honest, previous efforts to get federal shield laws during the 1970s and 1980s failed because the media could not agree on what they wanted," she said.

THERE IS FAR from universal support for a federal shield law. Many prosecutors and other federal judicial authorities oppose such a step out of concern that it would exempt journalists unnecessarily from the responsibilities that other citizens share -- such as the obligation to testify at trials when called to do so.

"I don't think it's needed," said Joseph DiGenova, a former U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia and a onetime special prosecutor in a federal case.

But DiGenova said there are legitimate concerns about the recent series of federal efforts to force reporters to divulge the names of sources to whom they had pledged anonymity.

DiGenova said the Taricani case may be an example of a judge's failure to balance competing public interests. Since former Mayor Vincent A. Cianci Jr. was evidently tried and convicted fairly, with evidence including a videotape leaked to Taricani for a TV newscast, DiGenova questioned whether the fruitless effort to identify the person who leaked the tape is worth precipitating "a constitutional crisis" around Taricani's claim to First Amendment protection.

NBC Universal, which owns Channel 10, released this statement: "We strongly believe Congress needs to pass a federal shield law that supports the rights of journalists to protect their confidential sources. Without this protection, many sources will withhold newsworthy information that is important to share with the public. We support any effort to bring this important issue to the forefront of Congress' agenda."

Taricani has received hundreds of e-mails supporting his decision to protect his source. "The outpouring of support that Jim and the station have received is really awesome," said Clare Eckert, spokeswoman for Channel 10.

MEMBERS OF THE Rhode Island Congressional delegation said some form of federal protection of journalists' news sources should be considered, though they said there isn't enough time left in this Congress to give it proper study.

Rep. James Langevin, who said he called Taricani yesterday to express support, said "I tend to be supportive of a shield law at the federal level because it's in the public's interest to have people who are willing to speak up," for example, against official corruption. Ideally, citizens privy to criminal behavior will cooperate with the police and other authorities, Langevin said, but realistically, whistleblowers often feel they need the protection of a press willing to go to great lengths to protect a source's identity, he said.

A federal standard should "at the very least cover people who are willing to speak off the record" in the process of conveying important news -- such as official wrongdoing -- with reporters, Langevin said. He said he has "a sense" that a federal shield law could attract "significant support" in Congress.

In a statement issued by his office, Rep. Patrick J. Kennedy spoke of Rhode Islanders' "great respect for the work Jim Taricani has performed for decades." Kennedy said "a national standard will ensure the free flow of information and protections for journalists reporting the news. . . . The reality is that we must be certain that sources of information are assured of confidentiality. Otherwise, we jeopardize the public's right to know. Without the ability to ensure the anonymity of their sources, journalists' hands become tied and the public's access to information is restricted."

Sen. Jack Reed believes it is "appropriate for Congress to debate the protection of reporters' confidential sources in federal cases," said his press secretary, Greg McCarthy. "We should start that debate in the next Congress," he quoted Reed as saying.

Sen. Lincoln D. Chafee's spokesman, Steve Hourahan, said the Rhode Island Republican "looks forward in the 109th Congress to joining in a bipartisan response" to the First Amendment issues raised by the Taricani case and the case of Valerie Plame, the CIA agent whose name was leaked to a newspaper columnist.

Dodd quoted two framers of the Constitution to emphasize the importance of a free flow of information to the health of he republic. "Knowledge will forever govern ignorance," Dodd said, quoting James Madison. "And a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives." He also quoted Thomas Jefferson's famous aphorism expressing preference for "newspapers without a government" over "a government without newspapers."

The key judicial precedent on journalistic claims of protection for confidential sources -- the 1972 Supreme Court case Branzburg v. Hayes -- has spawned conflicting lines of guidance in different jurisdictions around the country.

A divided court rejected the claim that the First Amendment affords journalists a privilege that allows them to refuse a grand jury's direction to name confidential sources.

DIGITAL EXTRA: Do you think Channel 10 investigative reporter Jim Taricani should have revealed his source? Share your thoughts on why or why not, at:

http://projo.com/taricani