By Melissa Davlin, President
Journalists shouldn’t have to choose between protecting their sources or going to jail for defying a subpoena, and sources shouldn’t have to worry about litigation revealing their communications with reporters.
Idaho is one of ten states without a shield law in statute. While case law does exist, it’s narrow in scope and protects only information that attorneys can find elsewhere. That won’t help a newsroom protect anonymous whistleblowers, or prevent us from turning over our notes, recordings, and communications.
We want to change that. The Idaho Press Club’s media shield law proposal got through its introductory hearing on February 5th. You can read the bill text and follow its progress here: https://legislature.idaho.gov/sessioninfo/2025/legislation/H0158/
We have a difficult road ahead. Our sponsor got some tough questions in committee about the need for the law and its scope. We anticipated those questions, and our lobbyist, Ken Burgess, and I are going to meet with lawmakers over the coming days and weeks to answer their concerns.
But we’re more determined now than ever. Subpoenas are a growing concern for Idaho newsrooms, especially as budgets shrink. In my twelve years on the Idaho Press Club Board of Directors, I’ve never received so many requests to help quash subpoenas as I have in the last eight months.
Fighting subpoenas to protect our sources costs financial resources – sometimes thousands of dollars – and time that we should be spending reporting on our communities and government. If we aren’t successful and a court compels us to testify or turn over unpublished notes and materials, it erodes the public’s trust in their ability to confide in journalists to uncover stories that matter to them.
Our proposed legislation, based on laws in Alabama and Kentucky, doesn’t define “journalism,” “reporters,” or “newsrooms.” Instead, it protects people “engaged in journalistic activities” who are connected to news outlets, both physical and digital, as well as “unpublished information, notes, or communications created through the course of newsgathering.” This creates broader protections for freelancers and non-traditional outlets as well as legacy newsrooms and full-time journalists.
It does not, however, protect people who call themselves journalists who are engaged in activity that isn’t journalism, like protesting or creating provocative content. Those activities are protected elsewhere in the First Amendment, but they aren’t the purview of this legislation.
You can read more about the proposal in the Idaho Capital Sun: https://idahocapitalsun.com/2025/02/05/idaho-legislature-introduces-bill-to-protect-confidential-sources-for-journalists/
And regardless of what happens with this bill, the Idaho Press Club will keep fighting for journalists’ ability to do their jobs.
