A bill introduced in the Idaho Legislature on Wednesday seeks to protect sources who provide journalists with confidential information.
On Wednesday afternoon, the House Judiciary, Rules and Administration Committee voted unanimously to introduce the new bill, which would create a media shield law in Idaho.
Reps. Marco Erickson and Barbara Ehardt, both R-Idaho Falls, sponsored the bill.
Erickson said Idaho is one of 10 states in the United States that do not have a shield law protecting sources who provide confidential information to journalists.
“No person engaged in journalistic activities shall be compelled to disclose in any legal proceeding, trial before any court, or before any jury the source of any information procured or obtained and published in a newspaper, print publication, digital news outlet, or by a radio or television broadcasting station with which the person is engaged or employed or with which the person is connected,” the bill states.
The bill also applies to unpublished information, notes or communications obtained through the newsgathering process. It would not shield information “in cases involving national security or imminent physical harm.”
Idaho Press Club President Melissa Davlin said the bill protects news organizations and sources alike.
“The First Amendment protects the right to a free press – our ability to report and hold the powerful accountable, but it is much more difficult to do so if our sources cannot trust that information they give us off-the-record or anonymously or all of our communications are going to be secure and safe,” Davlin said in an interview Wednesday.
Subpeonas on the rise
Last year, EastIdahoNews.com was subpoenaed and forced to play a private, off-the-record conversation between a reporter and a source in court.
Last summer, Boise attorney Steven Wieland attempted to subpoena BoiseDev for access to an email referenced in a 2023 story about a lawsuit involving ownership of a hotel. Wieland, on behalf of his client, threatened to ask a judge to hold BoiseDev in contempt of court. Contempt charges can carry fines up to $5,000 and jail time up to 30 days.
After serving the subpoena, Wieland sent an email to BoiseDev reporter Margaret Carmel on the matter.
“Everything is okay, we’re just looking for your communications with Hitendra Chokshi, his son, and others who might have been working with them,” Wieland wrote. “That includes call recordings. We think it’s relevant to determining (sic) what their purpose was in bringing this lawsuit in the first place. We don’t need your communications with me (for obvious reasons).”
After more than a month of wrangling, BoiseDev’s legal counsel illustrated to Wieland that his client could obtain the email sought from other parties, and he eventually tabled the matter. Fighting the subpoena cost BoiseDev several thousand dollars and extensive staff time.
Legislators look to help
After EastIdahoNews went public, Erickson and Ehardt approached the news organization looking to help, and Davlin got involved as president of the Idaho Press Club.
Davlin reached out to the nonprofit Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press for resources and support, and she based Idaho’s bill on media shield laws that have been in place in Alabama and Kentucky for decades.
Davlin has been involved with the Idaho Press Club for 12 years, and said she has seen a significant recent increase in people and organizations subpoenaing news organizations in an attempt to gain access to private, confidential information that sources share.
Without donors like you, this story would not exist.
Make a donation of any size here
Davlin also said she has personal experience with anonymous sources who sought to provide documents for a news story but backed out after becoming worried their confidentiality might not be guaranteed.
“In the last year I have had more newsrooms and more reporters ask me for help quashing subpoenas than the entire time (I have served on the Idaho Press Club board of directors),” Davlin said. “It has come up in multiple parts of the state and multiple newsrooms, so it’s not like there’s one bad actor who is sending out subpoenas.”
Often, Davlin said it is small, independent local news organizations that are hurt the most by subpoenas seeking the disclosure of confidential information because they do not have the budget to go to court or have an attorney on staff.
Questions raised
Although no legislators voted against introducing the new media shield bill, several legislators asked questions Wednesday about how the bill works or whether it is necessary.
Rep. Chris Mathias, D-Boise, said he would like additional information about whether the bill would protect illegitimate organizations that are set up to look and act like legitimate news organizations.
Introducing the bill clears the way for it to return to the House Judiciary, Rules and Administration Committee for a full public hearing.
The new media shield bill will be assigned a number and publicly posted on the Idaho Legislature’s website after it is read across the desk on the floor of the Idaho House, likely on Thursday.
Disclosure: The Idaho Capital Sun & BoiseDev’s journalists are members of the Idaho Press Club.
BoiseDev’s Don Day contributed reporting.
