Case Settled, Cert Denied

By Murray, Casey | News Media and the Law, Summer 2006 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Case Settled, Cert Denied


Murray, Casey, News Media and the Law


When five news organizations agreed to pay former nuclear scientist Wen Ho Lee $750,000 as part of a larger settlement of his Privacy Act lawsuit against the government, the payout was unprecedented.

While the June settlement cemented that the U.S. Supreme Court will not hear a reporter's privilege case during its next term, leaving that area of the law unsettled, it was not a complete loss for the news media.

"I think this case certainly shows that the news media should he doing everything in its power to secure the passage of a federal shield law so that the confusion that is now rampant in this area of law can be clarified so everybody knows what the rules are," said Lee Levine of Levine Sullivan Koch & Schulz in Washington, D.C., who represented reporters Josef Hebert of The Associated Press and Bob Drogin of the Los Angeles Times in the Lee case.

In 2000, Lee sued the U.S. Departments of Energy and Justice and the FBI, claiming they violated his rights under the Privacy Act by publicly releasing information about him. At the time, federal agents were investigating Lee for suspected espionage regarding nuclear secrets. Prosecutors eventually cleared Lee of all charges except mishandling classified information.

In order to discover who leaked his personal information, Lee subpoenaed six reporters who covered the investigation: Pierre Thomas, formerly of CNN and now with ABC News; James Risen and Jeff Gerth of The New York Times; Hebert of The Associated Press; Drogin of the Los Angeles Times; and Walter Pincus of the Post. The reporters refused to comply with the subpoenas and in August 2004, U.S. District Judge Thomas P.Jackson found all the reporters but Pincus - whose case was proceeding more slowly on the same track - in contempt and fined them $500 per day until they complied. The fine was suspended pending appeals.

The reporters appealed and in June 2005, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., agreed with the contempt finding while dismissing the case against Gerth. After the full court refused to hear the case in November, and Pincus was subsequently given the same penalty.

Levine said the federal appellate court ruling, while upholding the contempt rulings, was not a complete loss.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Case Settled, Cert Denied
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?