Photographer Sues House Jan. 6 Committee Over ‘Invasive’ Subpoena

excalibur

Diamond Member
Mar 19, 2015
18,138
34,341
2,290
The sick joke is the fascistic January 6 Committee. More and more people are tired of it and see it for what it is.




A freelance photojournalist is suing the House Select Committee investigating the Jan. 6 breach of the U.S. Capitol, saying the panel issued “an invasive and sweeping subpoena” of her phone records that violates the First Amendment.

Amy Harris, a photographer who has worked with outlets including The Washington Post, The New York Times, and Time magazine, filed a lawsuit on Wednesday afternoon in federal court in Washington.

Her 23-page suit (pdf) seeks to block a subpoena issued by the Jan. 6 panel, arguing that demanding her phone records violates her right not to reveal confidential sources. The subpoena would compel her phone carrier, Verizon, to hand over her phone records dated from Nov. 1, 2020 through Jan. 31, 2021.

Harris had documented the Proud Boys and its leader, Henry “Enrique” Tarrio, in the days before the Jan. 6 breach and on the day itself.

...

It also states that the subpoena is “overly broad with respect to time frame” and “contains no limitations seeking to preserve applicable privileges or prevent violations of Harris’s constitutional rights.”

“Demanding journalists’ telephone records that reveal confidential sources from third parties is tantamount to demanding the records from the journalists themselves,” Harris’s suit argues. “A journalist’s promise to maintain confidentiality would be meaningless if a source’s identity could be discovered” through such methods.

...


 
Can you say "I plead the Fifth"?
Is that another one of those inconvenient Constitutional freedoms that get in your way? Turning over all of a journalist's phone records then creating any narrative they like, makes the 5th untenable. If they refuse to testify it's like an admission of guilt on the narrative. A day is coming when this shit stops being funny because it STARTS BEING YOU.
 
Is that another one of those inconvenient Constitutional freedoms that get in your way? Turning over all of a journalist's phone records then creating any narrative they like, makes the 5th untenable. If they refuse to testify it's like an admission of guilt on the narrative. A day is coming when this shit stops being funny because it STARTS BEING YOU.
The tables will turn soon
 
Report button? Is that what happened in your mind?

The investigation continues, your spectacular and delightful meltdown here notwithstanding.

"I plead the Fifth"!
Meltdowns aren't truth. Facts are a lie to you

Meltdown?????.......................LOLOL.......................You've never saw a meltdown from me yet...lolol.......You want to see one?
 
Report button? Is that what happened in your mind?

The investigation continues, your spectacular and delightful meltdown here notwithstanding.

"I plead the Fifth"!

Well I was yanked from that thread a quik like....lol
 
I've never seen so many lawsuits directed at a congressional select committee....they are going to be in court a lot....
 
The sick joke is the fascistic January 6 Committee. More and more people are tired of it and see it for what it is.


A freelance photojournalist is suing the House Select Committee investigating the Jan. 6 breach of the U.S. Capitol, saying the panel issued “an invasive and sweeping subpoena” of her phone records that violates the First Amendment.
Amy Harris, a photographer who has worked with outlets including The Washington Post, The New York Times, and Time magazine, filed a lawsuit on Wednesday afternoon in federal court in Washington.
Her 23-page suit (pdf) seeks to block a subpoena issued by the Jan. 6 panel, arguing that demanding her phone records violates her right not to reveal confidential sources. The subpoena would compel her phone carrier, Verizon, to hand over her phone records dated from Nov. 1, 2020 through Jan. 31, 2021.
Harris had documented the Proud Boys and its leader, Henry “Enrique” Tarrio, in the days before the Jan. 6 breach and on the day itself.
...
It also states that the subpoena is “overly broad with respect to time frame” and “contains no limitations seeking to preserve applicable privileges or prevent violations of Harris’s constitutional rights.”
“Demanding journalists’ telephone records that reveal confidential sources from third parties is tantamount to demanding the records from the journalists themselves,” Harris’s suit argues. “A journalist’s promise to maintain confidentiality would be meaningless if a source’s identity could be discovered” through such methods.
...


She's a witness to a crime. Testify or plead the Fifth.
 
The sick joke is the fascistic January 6 Committee. More and more people are tired of it and see it for what it is.


A freelance photojournalist is suing the House Select Committee investigating the Jan. 6 breach of the U.S. Capitol, saying the panel issued “an invasive and sweeping subpoena” of her phone records that violates the First Amendment.
Amy Harris, a photographer who has worked with outlets including The Washington Post, The New York Times, and Time magazine, filed a lawsuit on Wednesday afternoon in federal court in Washington.
Her 23-page suit (pdf) seeks to block a subpoena issued by the Jan. 6 panel, arguing that demanding her phone records violates her right not to reveal confidential sources. The subpoena would compel her phone carrier, Verizon, to hand over her phone records dated from Nov. 1, 2020 through Jan. 31, 2021.
Harris had documented the Proud Boys and its leader, Henry “Enrique” Tarrio, in the days before the Jan. 6 breach and on the day itself.
...
It also states that the subpoena is “overly broad with respect to time frame” and “contains no limitations seeking to preserve applicable privileges or prevent violations of Harris’s constitutional rights.”
“Demanding journalists’ telephone records that reveal confidential sources from third parties is tantamount to demanding the records from the journalists themselves,” Harris’s suit argues. “A journalist’s promise to maintain confidentiality would be meaningless if a source’s identity could be discovered” through such methods.
...


Is it really a surprise that people are seeing this for the McCarthism that it is? I'm not.
 

Forum List

Back
Top