Other Free Encyclopedias » Law Library - American Law and Legal Information » Notable Trials and Court Cases - 1963 to 1972

Branzburg v. Hayes - Significance, Dissent Proposes Qualified Protection For Confidential News Sources, Pro And Con: Naming Media Sources

press freedom amendment william

Appellant

Paul M. Branzburg

Appellee

John P. Hayes, Judge

Appellant's Claim

That the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of the press provides the press with a privilege protecting the confidentiality of media sources.

Chief Lawyer for Appellant

Edgar A. Zingman

Chief Lawyer for Appellee

Edwin A. Schroering, Jr.

Justices for the Court

Harry A. Blackmun, Warren E. Burger, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., William H. Rehnquist, Byron R. White (writing for the Court)

Justices Dissenting

William J. Brennan, Jr., William O. Douglas, Thurgood Marshall, Potter Stewart

Place

Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

29 June 1972

Decision

The Supreme Court ruled against a special First Amendment privilege that would allow the press to refuse to answer grand jury questions concerning news sources.

Related Cases

  • Cohen v. Cowles Media Co., 501 U.S. 663 (1991).

Sources

Cornell. http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/

West's Encyclopedia of American Law. Volume 2. Minneapolis, MN: West Publishing, 1998.

Further Readings

  • The First Amendment Reconsidered: New Perspectives on the Meaning of Freedom of Speech and Press. New York: Longman, 1982.
  • Fuentes, Annette. "The Subpoena Club: Survey of News Organizations by Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press." Columbia Journalism Review. March-May, 1992, pp. 8-9.
  • Scarce, Rik. "Confidential Sources." The Progressive. October, 1993, p. 38.

Additional Topics

Branzburg v. Hayes - Significance

The decision in Branzburg v. Hayes gave rise to considerable controversy and the implementation of several state laws shielding the press from grand jury inquiry. Paul Branzburg, a reporter with the Louisville Courier-Journal, was subpoenaed to appear before a grand jury to testify about his story concerning the manufacture of hashish. He appeared, but he refused to answer questions about the indi…

Branzburg v. Hayes - Dissent Proposes Qualified Protection For Confidential News Sources

Justice Stewart's dissenting opinion stressed the importance of confidentiality to the news-gathering process:[W]e have held that the right to publish is central to the First Amendment and basic to the existence of constitutional democracy . . . A corollary of the right to publish must be the right to gather news. The full flow of information to the public protected by the free-press guarantee wou…

Branzburg v. Hayes - Pro And Con: Naming Media Sources

The issue of journalists' and other media personnels' privilege in not naming sources of information has been tested in cases at the state level and in the U.S. Supreme Court. The High Court asserted that journalists must appear and testify in response to subpoenas issued by grand juries. In cases of criminal matters, journalists have no greater privilege to withhold critical evidence than any oth…

Brief for Appellant - Brief For Appellant, Table Of Contents, Jurisdiction, Statutes Involved, Questions Presented, Statement Of The Case [next] [back] Brandenburg v. Ohio - Significance, The Ohio Criminal Syndicalism Law, Whitney Reversed, Impact

User Comments

Your email address will be altered so spam harvesting bots can't read it easily.
Hide my email completely instead?

Cancel or