President-elect Donald Trump campaigned on the message that journalists are the “enemy of the people,” but has now publicly opposed a bipartisan bill that would protect reporters and their sources from government interference. In a recent social media post, Trump demanded that Republicans “MUST KILL THIS BILL.”
The PRESS Act, a federal reporter shield bill with widespread support, passed the House of Representatives in January with unanimous approval. However, it has been stalled in the Democrat-led Senate Judiciary Committee for months, where sponsors from both parties now must navigate around Trump’s sudden opposition.
Trump’s stance came after an interview with Jodie Ginsberg, CEO of the Committee to Protect Journalists, who urged Congress to pass the PRESS Act before Trump’s return to the White House.
“We know that Trump is interested in going after whistleblowers,” Ginsberg told “PBS NewsHour.” “And it’s absolutely essential that they are protected, and that journalists’ sources are protected, and that journalists are allowed to do their job.”
As of a few weeks ago, only three Republicans in the Senate expressed opposition to the PRESS Act, revealed a source familiar with the discussions to The Intercept.
“Conservative, liberal, and nonpartisan media all depend on speaking to sources without fear of being spied on by government officials who want to suppress unflattering information.”
With the House passing a bill on Thursday that would give Trump expanded power to target nonprofit media outlets, the PRESS Act at least aims to restrict federal agents’ authority to identify confidential sources and seize journalists’ communications.
“There’s nothing more commonsense, or more bipartisan, than shielding journalists from unnecessary government surveillance,” stated Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., the primary Senate sponsor of the bill, in an email. “Conservative, liberal, and nonpartisan media all depend on speaking to sources without fear of being spied on by government officials who want to suppress unflattering information.”
The PRESS Act, also known as the Protect Reporters from Exploitative State Spying Act, would address a significant gap in legal protections for journalists. It would prevent federal agencies like the FBI from uncovering leakers through subpoenas to journalists, their internet providers, or other service providers. Additionally, it would prohibit federal judges from compelling reporters to surrender confidential emails, notes, or other records.
The bill was designed to safeguard full-time staff reporters and independent journalists, with exceptions in defamation cases or if a reporter is under criminal investigation. It includes limited exemptions, such as in cases where certain information is deemed necessary to prevent acts of terrorism or imminent violence. Even in these instances, reporters would be notified of the subpoena and given the chance to challenge it unless a court decides otherwise.
The majority of states have similar shield laws in place, but these laws do not apply to federal investigations. Although many federal courts have acknowledged similar protections under the First Amendment, there is no consistent standard.
“You’ve got this confusing patchwork of federal appellate circuits applying the reporter’s privilege in entirely different ways based on where you are, which legal theories are at play, and other factors,” explained Seth Stern, advocacy director at the Freedom of the Press Foundation. “Right now, reporters can’t anticipate all of them when a source asks, ‘Can you protect me?’”
“If journalists can’t assure their sources that their identity will remain confidential, sources simply aren’t going to come forward,” Stern added.
Press advocates have long fought for a federal reporter shield law, with bipartisan efforts reflecting the fact that the Justice Department has targeted reporters’ sources under administrations of both Republican and Democratic presidents.
The Obama administration, for instance, obtained two months’ worth of the Associated Press’s phone records for one leak investigation. It also fought for years to compel The Intercept’s James Risen to testify about confidential sources. Similarly, under George W. Bush, federal prosecutors pressured reporters to reveal leakers.
“Unfortunately, multiple presidential administrations have abused U.S. laws to spy on reporters just for doing their jobs,” said Joe Mullin, senior policy analyst at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. “The PRESS Act, with strong bipartisan support, would put an end to this abuse of power.”
In response to revelations that the Trump Justice Department covertly sought phone records and email data from reporters at the New York Times, the Washington Post, and CNN, Wyden introduced the PRESS Act in 2021. The bill passed the House but faced a roadblock in the Senate in late 2022 when Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., opposed it in a speech that referenced the release of the Pentagon Papers in 1971.
“Multiple presidential administrations have abused U.S. laws to spy on reporters just for doing their jobs.”
Wyden, along with Republican co-sponsors Mike Lee of Utah and Lindsay Graham of South Carolina, reintroduced the PRESS Act in 2023. The House version passed unanimously in January.
Currently, the PRESS Act is under review by the Senate Judiciary Committee, led by co-sponsor Dick Durbin, D-Ill.
Despite pleas from civil liberties and press organizations, including The Intercept, Durbin has not scheduled the bill for markup.
“I joined my colleagues in introducing the PRESS Act to ensure that journalists have the necessary protections to speak with their sources and do their jobs effectively without undue government interference,” Durbin said in an emailed statement. “And I will continue to work with my colleagues to see this bill advance.”
With just weeks to go in the lame-duck session, there seemed to be three potential holdouts against the PRESS Act before Trump weighed in.
In response to a recent hotline — a poll of senator’s positions about passing a given bill through the chamber’s unanimous consent mechanism — three Republicans indicated they would object to the PRESS Act, a source familiar with the results told The Intercept: Cotton remains opposed, plus John Cornyn of Texas and John Kennedy of Louisiana.
Cotton and Kennedy did not respond to questions about the PRESS Act, and Cornyn’s office declined to comment on his position.
“Based on the feedback we’ve received from senators and President Trump, it’s clear we have work to do to achieve consensus on this issue,” said Rep. Kevin Kiley, R-Calif., the bill’s Republican sponsor in the House.
