Everything online journalists need to protect their legal rights. This free resource culls from all Reporters Committee resources and includes exclusive content on digital media law issues.
In response to a letter from the Reporters Committee, a federal appeals court has taken a critical first step toward unsealing an opinion in a high-profile Washington, D.C. corruption case.
The appellate court treated the letter as a motion to intervene and unseal part of the record. The court ordered the parties to respond and suggest redactions to its opinion within 30 days.
Two Kentucky newspapers earned a victory in a lengthy legal battle with child welfare officials this week when a state appellate court ruled that records relating to child abuse cases that resulted in death or near-fatal injuries must continue to be publicly disclosed.
A Pennsylvania appellate court ruled on Tuesday that the state Department of Transportation must release records on speed enforcement devices used by state police agencies in full – without any redactions – under the state's Right-to-Know Law to an engineer whose speeding ticket sparked the requests.
A judicial order that a news organization redact material presented during open court is an unconstitutional prior restraint on publication, Massachusetts’ highest court ruled today.
The state’s Supreme Judicial Court also directed its Judiciary-Media Committee to develop guidelines for the live online streaming pilot project of the National Public Radio station in Boston at the heart of the legal dispute.
An investigative report about alleged prosecutorial misconduct in the corruption case against the late U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens will be released after a Washington, D.C., federal judge yesterday found that the public's right of access overcame several of the lawyers’ claims that disclosure of the document would damage their reputations.
The Oklahoma Supreme Court earlier this week nixed a proposed rule that would have severely limited personal information contained in court records in favor of one that allows, but does not require, the omission of basic identifying data.
An outspoken pain relief advocate has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to shield her from a grand jury subpoena that threatens her First Amendment right to criticize the government, according to a recently unsealed but still redacted petition in a case that also has implications for journalists called before grand juries.
The United States Supreme Court today denied the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press' motion to intervene in a pending case but allowed a redacted version of the petitioners' request for Supreme Court review to be publicly filed.
