Shield law stalls in general assembly
Consideration has been halted by Sen. Matt Bartle, R-Blue Springs, the chairman of the Judiciary and Civil and Criminal Jurisprudence Committee and Sen. Chris Koster, R-Harrisonville, the Majority Caucus chairman.
Published April 7, 2006
Objections from key lawmakers in Jefferson City will keep the proposed shield law for journalists from passing this legislative session, according to the office of Sen. Chuck Graham, D-Columbia.
The proposed law would have required prosecutors to show that information obtained by reporters from confidential sources would be vitally important to the court case and all other ways of obtaining the information had been exhausted before a judge could require the reporter to give up the information.
"It looks like it's probably dead for this session," said Ted Farnen, chief of staff for Graham.
Graham sponsored one version of the bill.
Another version, sponsored by Sen. Jason Crowell, R-Cape Girardeau, has also been stalled and a substitute bill that would address the differences between the two bills will not be presented because of the delay, said Crowell's legislative assistant Andrew Green.
Farnen said Sens. Matt Bartle, R-Blue Springs, the chairman of the Judiciary and Civil and Criminal Jurisprudence Committee and Chris Koster, R-Harrisonville, the Majority Caucus chairman halted consideration.
"Sen. Koster and Sen. Bartle had some concerns, and Bartle is chairman so if he doesn't want something to get through his committee it doesn't," Farnen said.
Farnen also said Bartle and Koster had concerns about the way the bill could interfere with court proceedings.
"I think it was their opinion that this might interfere with getting at the truth in a trial or some legal procedure," Farnen said.
"We don't feel that way. The shield law does not say that it's impossible for this material to ever be used, they just need to show why it is needed, and that all other avenues were explored before you require reporters to give up information from confidential sources. We really feel it's important not to interfere with a reporter's job, and sometimes they need confidential sources to get information."
Journalism professor Sandy Davidson said the ability for judges to run their own courtrooms is always an issue when shield laws are considered.
"Some judges don't like for lawmakers to tell them who can testify in their courts," Davidson said.
"They will find ways around it so if the shield law gives protection to sources, they'll say that source means source, not just the information. A really good shield law would give absolute protection to journalists, and have a broad definition of 'journalist.' Coverage should be broad enough so that it's not just for the grand jury and court proceedings but also for legislative proceedings and things like that."
Green said objections also were raised because the bill allowed too much flexibility as to how the judge could apply the law if it passed.
Graham is not done trying to pass a shield law, though. Farnen said Graham would work to have a bill ready to be presented in the next session.
"What Sen. Graham wants to do is work with Sen. Bartle and Sen. Koster and anyone else who has concerns to address them and get a bill that everyone agrees to next year," he said.
