The privilege applies to grand jury subpoenas. See, e.g., O.C.G.A. § 24-9-30 (privilege applies "in any proceeding where the one asserting the privilege is not a party"); In re Paul, 270 Ga. 680, 684 (Ga. 1999).
The North Dakota Supreme Court has stated that the nature of the action is something that the trial court may consider in determining whether disclosure is appropriate. The statute does not make a distinction between grand jury subpoenas and those issued during discovery. Accordingly, the privilege should not be more difficult to defend at this level.
Grand jury subpoenas are treated the same as any other subpoena under the statute. See Neb. Rev. Stat. § 86-708(1) (Reissue 1999) noting that grand jury subpoenas shall not suspend or otherwise interfere with the shield law. Nebraska rarely utilizes grand juries. The authors are not aware of any grand jury subpoenas having been issued to reporters.
The Eastern District of Arkansas in In re Grand Jury Subpoena ABC, Inc., 947 F. Supp. 1314 (1996), held that there is no reporter's privilege in the grand jury context, at least absent bad faith or an abuse of grand jury function. The court found the Supreme Court's decision in Branzburg controlling on the question, interpreting Justice Powell's concurring opinion narrowly.
No Iowa case relates to the reporter's privilege and grand jury subpoenas. Because the Iowa cases so heavily rely on Branzburg, it is likely the privilege would be more easily subordinated in a grand jury context.