New York Times turns to Supreme Court

[Stephanie]

Fri Nov 24, 4:57 PM ET



WASHINGTON - The New York Times asked the Supreme Court on Friday to block the government from reviewing the phone records of two reporters in a leak investigation about a terrorism-funding probe.

ADVERTISEMENTThe case involved stories written in 2001 by Times reporters Judith Miller and Philip Shenon that revealed the government's plans to freeze the assets of two Islamic charities, the Holy Land Foundation and the Global Relief Foundation.

In a 2-1 decision, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said federal prosecutors can see the phone records of Shenon and Miller. Miller retired from the Times a year ago.

The Times wants Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to block temporarily the government from going through the records so that the newspaper can prepare a petition arguing why the justices should step into the case. Ginsburg asked the Justice Department for a response.

A federal judge had ruled that the records were off limits unless prosecutors could show they had exhausted all other means of finding out who spoke to the newspaper.

The appeals court said a grand jury investigation of the disclosures wasn't likely to go anywhere without help from the reporters or access to their records.

In papers filed with the Supreme Court, the Times said when confidential sources confirmed that the assets of two charities would be frozen, Shenon and Miller called the two organizations for comment.

The government, which is conducting a leak investigation to try to find out the reporters' sources, says those phone calls tipped off the charities of planned government raids. A federal judge who ruled in the newspaper's favor said there is no evidence in the record suggesting the reporters even knew of the government's plans to raid either charity.

In a separate matter, Miller spent 85 days in jail for defying court orders that she testify in the investigation into who in the Bush administration leaked the identity of covert CIA officer Valerie Plame.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061124/ap_on_go_ot/scotus_nytimes

 

[Avatar4321]

This is a joke right? Having a free press doesnt mean Newspapers are allowed to hide information in a government investigation. It simply means one can write about whatever they want.

 

[red states rule]

I would like to be a fly on the wall in the editors office as the SC tells the NY Times to drop dead

I have to admit, the Times has a lot of balls. They insult, smear, (and make racial attacks on Justice Thomas), now they come pleading to these same conservative Judges for a favor?

 

[Avatar4321]

I would like to be a fly on the wall in the editors office as the SC tells the NY Times to drop dead

I have to admit, the Times has a lot of balls. They insult, smear, (and make racial attacks on Justice Thomas), now they come pleading to these same conservative Judges for a favor?

Can we trust the SC to?

 

[Hobbit]

In a separate matter, Miller spent 85 days in jail for defying court orders that she testify in the investigation into who in the Bush administration leaked the identity of covert CIA officer Valerie Plame.

For the last time, jackasses, that woman was about as covert as a carpet bombing. If she actually used her husband's last name, I could have figured out who she was.

You know, back in the day, you had to have a contact in an enemy regime to leak vital information to the enemy. Now all you need is a reporter at a newspaper.

 

[red states rule]

Supreme Court Rejects N.Y. Times Request

The Supreme Court ruled against The New York Times on Monday, refusing to block the government from reviewing the phone records of two Times reporters in a leak investigation of a terrorism-funding probe.


The one-sentence order came in a First Amendment battle that involves stories written in 2001 by Times reporters Judith Miller and Philip Shenon. The stories revealed the government's plans to freeze the assets of two Islamic charities, the Holy Land Foundation and the Global Relief Foundation.


Like the CIA leak investigation into who in the Bush administration revealed the identity of Valerie Plame, the current Justice Department probe is being conducted by Patrick Fitzgerald, who is prosecuting Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff in the Plame case.


In June 2005, the Supreme Court refused to take up the Times' request to hear an appeal in the Plame investigation. Fitzgerald was seeking to compel Miller, who retired from the Times a year ago, to reveal her sources in that case.


That leak probe led to Miller's jailing for 85 days before she eventually agreed to testify in Fitzgerald's investigation. Her testimony was crucial in the indictment of former vice presidential chief of staff I. Lewis Libby.

The current dispute stems from Shenon and Miller calling two charities for comment after learning of the planned freeze on their assets from confidential sources.

The Justice Department says the reporters' calls tipped off the charities of upcoming government raids. A federal judge who ruled in the Times' favor said there is no evidence in the case even suggesting that the reporters tipped off the charities about the raids or that the reporters even knew the government would raid either charity.


In August, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that federal prosecutors could see the two reporters' phone records.


The government says the fact that the reporters relayed disclosures from a government source to "targets of an imminent law enforcement action substantially weakens any claim of freedom of the press."

At issue are 11 days of phone records the government plans to review in 2001 - for the dates Sept. 27-30, Dec. 1-3 and Dec. 10-13. In a declaration this month, Fitzgerald said the statute of limitations "on certain substantive offenses that the grand jury is investigating" will expire on Dec. 3 and Dec. 13 of this year.

The current leak probe is in Fitzgerald's capacity as U.S. attorney in Chicago. The Libby prosecution is in Fitzgerald's role as a special counsel who was selected by a Justice Department superior to conduct that particular investigation.


http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/11/27/154344.shtml?s=al&promo_code=29BA-1

© 2006 Associated Press.

 

[Stephanie]

Supreme Court Rejects N.Y. Times Request

The Supreme Court ruled against The New York Times on Monday, refusing to block the government from reviewing the phone records of two Times reporters in a leak investigation of a terrorism-funding probe.


The one-sentence order came in a First Amendment battle that involves stories written in 2001 by Times reporters Judith Miller and Philip Shenon. The stories revealed the government's plans to freeze the assets of two Islamic charities, the Holy Land Foundation and the Global Relief Foundation.


Like the CIA leak investigation into who in the Bush administration revealed the identity of Valerie Plame, the current Justice Department probe is being conducted by Patrick Fitzgerald, who is prosecuting Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff in the Plame case.


In June 2005, the Supreme Court refused to take up the Times' request to hear an appeal in the Plame investigation. Fitzgerald was seeking to compel Miller, who retired from the Times a year ago, to reveal her sources in that case.


That leak probe led to Miller's jailing for 85 days before she eventually agreed to testify in Fitzgerald's investigation. Her testimony was crucial in the indictment of former vice presidential chief of staff I. Lewis Libby.

The current dispute stems from Shenon and Miller calling two charities for comment after learning of the planned freeze on their assets from confidential sources.

The Justice Department says the reporters' calls tipped off the charities of upcoming government raids. A federal judge who ruled in the Times' favor said there is no evidence in the case even suggesting that the reporters tipped off the charities about the raids or that the reporters even knew the government would raid either charity.


In August, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that federal prosecutors could see the two reporters' phone records.


The government says the fact that the reporters relayed disclosures from a government source to "targets of an imminent law enforcement action substantially weakens any claim of freedom of the press."

At issue are 11 days of phone records the government plans to review in 2001 - for the dates Sept. 27-30, Dec. 1-3 and Dec. 10-13. In a declaration this month, Fitzgerald said the statute of limitations "on certain substantive offenses that the grand jury is investigating" will expire on Dec. 3 and Dec. 13 of this year.

The current leak probe is in Fitzgerald's capacity as U.S. attorney in Chicago. The Libby prosecution is in Fitzgerald's role as a special counsel who was selected by a Justice Department superior to conduct that particular investigation.


http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/11/27/154344.shtml?s=al&promo_code=29BA-1

© 2006 Associated Press.

Uh Oh........I'm getting my popcorn ready......