Branzburg v. Hayes - Significance, Dissent Proposes Qualified Protection For Confidential News Sources, Pro And Con: Naming Media Sources
Paul M. Branzburg
John P. Hayes, Judge
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)
William J. Brennan, Jr., William O. Douglas, Thurgood Marshall, Potter Stewart
Date of Decision
29 June 1972
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.
- Cohen v. Cowles Media Co., 501 U.S. 663 (1991).
West's Encyclopedia of American Law. Volume 2. Minneapolis, MN: West Publishing, 1998.
- 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.
- Brief for Appellant - Brief For Appellant, Table Of Contents, Jurisdiction, Statutes Involved, Questions Presented, Statement Of The Case
- Brandenburg v. Ohio - Significance, The Ohio Criminal Syndicalism Law, Whitney Reversed, Impact
- Branzburg v. Hayes - Significance
- Branzburg v. Hayes - Dissent Proposes Qualified Protection For Confidential News Sources
- Branzburg v. Hayes - Pro And Con: Naming Media Sources
- Other Free Encyclopedias