The newspaper has since put out a statement defending "the belief that every party named in a story has a right to comment or contest criticism leveled against them" as a way to "ensure the integrity, fairness, and accuracy" of their reporting.
The 1st, 3rd, 5th, 7th, 9th, and 11th U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals have all held that the First Amendment protects people who record police officers performing their official duties in public.
Facing fees up to $10,000 for publishing photographs and videos captured with drones, the group say the law has deterred journalists from reporting on newsworthy events of public interest.
Democratic Governor Tony Evers is being sued in federal court by MacIver Institute of Public Policy, a conservative think tank, […]
A Philadelphia-based nonprofit and an independent journalist have sued officials in Pennsylvania’s First Judicial District for banning audio recording in […]
Breaking News Update South Carolina Supreme Court Chief Justice Donald Beatty vacated the order that would have prohibited lawyers from […]
A Los Angeles Superior Court judge ruled that journalists at the Los Angeles Times do not have to disclose the […]
For an in depth examination of First Amendment Auditors and the right to film in public, click on the […]