A sheriff's deputy has arrived in your newsroom, with what you now are sure is a subpoena. In fact, let’s be more specific.
You spent six months investigating an in-depth enterprise piece on the influx of undocumented workers in a neighboring county. Your story follows one particular worker, whose identity you do not reveal, as he navigates his way through life, a life which includes using a false Social Security number and driving with no insurance.
Two weeks after the story appears, a deputy from that county's Sheriff's Department shows up at with a subpoena in hand that commands you to disclose the name and contact information of the worker in the story to local law enforcement and the district attorney.
What should you do?
First, don’t panic and don’t say anything substantive to the deputy.
Second, talk to your news director, editor, or publisher, who will undoubtedly contact the station's or the paper's attorney. It is important to take this step immediately, because in many states you must make any objections to the subpoena within a short period of time after being served with it. In North Carolina, for example, if you want to object to the subpoena, you must do so in writing within ten days. You may also within that same time period file a motion in court seeking an order declaring the subpoena to be invalid or without effect, which is called "quashing" the subpoena.
Third, gather and secure whatever evidence you have been asked to produce. It is important to preserve any documents or other materials that might be responsive to the subpoena. Destroying responsive information, even as part of the ordinary course of business, can subject the station or newspaper to sanctions by a court. Thus, even if the decision is made to fight the subpoena, a court may still in the end require you disclose some or all of the material called for by the subpoena. You need to ensure that it is not erased or discarded in the meantime.
Fourth, clam up. There is nothing to be gained from talking to your colleagues, neighbors, or friends about the subpoena. There are cautionary tales in this regard. It is especially important that you not disclose the sought-after information to anyone else, as they may find themselves served with a subpoena as well.
Of course, this same scenario could also result in someone from a federal agency serving your newsroom with a subpoena. For the most part, the steps you take are the same. One significant difference is that your response to the subpoena will be governed by federal, not state, rules of procedure. For example, under federal law you have fourteen days to object to or move to quash a subpoena.
Under both federal and state rules of civil procedure, you may have a range of bases for objecting to a subpoena. The first is that complying with the subpoena would impose “undue burden or expense.” So, for example, if the subpoena would require you to search and then copy hundreds and hundreds of hours of videotapes, a court may agree that the subpoena is too broad. Most likely, however, the court would simply order the person seeking the information to narrow the request. Similarly, if the subpoena does not give you enough time to comply, asks for information protected by a legally recognized privilege, or was procedurally defective, the subpoena may be narrowed or quashed.
None of these objections constitutes a permanent “get-out-of-subpoena-free card.” To avoid testifying completely or disclosing any information, you have two options. The first, in state court, is to invoke the protection of a reporter's shield law--if your state has one--that creates for reporters a legally recognized privilege against testifying or disclosing source materials. The second, available both in state and federal court, is far harder to make and relies on arguing for protection under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. We discussed the limitations on this approach in a prior post.
Add a comment
Archives
- January 2022
- June 2021
- March 2020
- August 2019
- March 2019
- October 2018
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- February 2016
- November 2015
- September 2015
- July 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- July 2014
- March 2014
- July 2013
- June 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- November 2011
- September 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2006
- February 2006
Recent Posts
- Rethinking Your Cyber Insurance Needs as Your Workplace Evolves
- Data Breach Defense for Educational Institutions
- COVID-19 and the Increased Cybersecurity Risk in a Work-From-Home World
- Like Incorporating Facebook into your Website? EU Decision Raises New Issues
- Lessons Learned: Key Takeaways for Every Business from the Capital One Data Breach
- Will Quick Talks to WRAL About Privacy Issues Related to Doorbell Cameras
- About Us
- Not in My House - California to Regulate IoT Device Security
- Ninth Circuit Says You’re Going to Jail for Visiting That Website without Permission
- Ninth Circuit Interprets “Without Authorization” under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
Topics
- Data Security
- Data Breach
- Privacy
- Defamation
- Public Records
- Cyberattack
- FCC Matters
- Reporters Privilege
- Political Advertising
- Newsroom Subpoenas
- Shield Laws
- Internet
- Miscellaneous
- Digital Media and Data Privacy Law
- Indecency
- First Amendment
- Anti-SLAPP Statutes
- Fair Report Privilege
- Prior Restraints
- Education
- Wiretapping
- Access to Courtrooms
- FOIA
- HIPAA
- Drone Law
- Access to Search Warrants
- Access to Court Dockets
- Intrusion
- First Amendment Retaliation
- Mobile Privacy
- Newsroom Search Warrants
- About This Blog
- Disclaimer
- Services