Kurd v. Republic of Turkey

Court: U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia

Date Filed: May 2, 2025

Background: In August 2024, Mutlu Civiroglu, a journalist for Voice of America’s Kurdish news service, was served two subpoenas from a defendant in ongoing litigation related to a 2017 attack against peaceful protesters outside of the Turkish ambassador’s residence in Washington, D.C. The subpoenas demanded that Civiroglu, who observed the event and communicated afterwards with sources, testify in the matter and hand over his communications relating to the attack and the ensuing lawsuit.

Civiroglu filed a motion to quash, invoking the reporter’s privilege under the D.C. shield law and the First Amendment. Because the matter involves both federal and state claims, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ordered supplemental briefing on whether to apply federal or state reporter’s privilege. Noting that Civiroglu’s motion “touches upon important First Amendment issues,” the court asked the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press to submit a friend-of-the-court brief concerning when, and to whom, the First Amendment privilege and/or the D.C. shield law applies.  

Our Position: The federal and D.C. reporter’s privileges are complementary. Based on the facts available in the parties’ publicly filed briefs, either privilege would require the same analysis and should result in the same conclusion: The court should apply the privilege here to quash the subpoena. If the court learns additional facts not presently available to amicus, it should consider them against the strong protections embedded in the First Amendment privilege and the D.C. shield law. 

• Two independent and complementary sources of a reporter’s privilege exist in the D.C. Circuit for persons engaged in obtaining or transmitting the news.

• The First Amendment privilege and D.C. shield law are complementary, but if there were a conflict, while ordinary choice of law principles typically point to applying the federal privilege in cases involving a federal claim, there are factors present here that support applying the shield law.

• Civiroglu is a journalist entitled to invoke the First Amendment privilege and D.C. shield law.

• To the extent that the defendant seeks impeachment evidence, that cannot overcome the privilege or the shield law. 

From the Brief: “Consistent application of the reporter’s privilege under the First Amendment and the D.C. Shield Law here is essential to robust newsgathering and the ability of journalists to fulfill their essential role in disseminating information to the public.”