> Cooke’s story, about an 8-year-old heroin addict, created an instant sensation—the 1980s equivalent of “going viral”—reprinted around the country and around the world. As DC Mayor Marion Barry and city health and police officials hustled to find the child and prosecute his guardian-tormentors, the Post stood fast behind its First Amendment right to protect its reporter from having to reveal the boy’s whereabouts.
That's begging the question! The First Amendment forbids restraint on the press — it says nothing about reporters being immune from reporting crimes.
Otherwise what would prevent anyone from claiming to be a reporter and refusing to testify?
A member of the press, or journalist/reporter, will be held in contempt for obstruction of justice if they're the only ones with information about a crime and they refuse to give up that information. It's looked at like a badge-of-honor for journalists to goto jail under this scenario, and it would also be journalistic suicide to give up a source. Check out Branzburg v. Hayes. There's "reporter's privilege" and shield laws which may help a reporter in some jurisdictions.
If there are other means, which is usually the case, to get such information, then those should be pursued before pressuring a reporter for that information.
That's begging the question! The First Amendment forbids restraint on the press — it says nothing about reporters being immune from reporting crimes.
Otherwise what would prevent anyone from claiming to be a reporter and refusing to testify?