ABSTRACT
During the December 8, 2004 oral argument of In Re Grand Jury Subpoena, Judith Miller, prominent First Amendment attorney Floyd Abrams conceded that web bloggers should have a constitutional privilege to refuse to disclose their confidential sources, just like journalists at major news outlets. Contemporary journalist's privilege cases also take place against the backdrop of several highly-publicized instances of fraudulent reporting at Newsweek, USA Today, CBS News, and the New York Times, including fabrication of anonymous sources or reliance upon anonymous sources that proved to be unreliable. The Supreme Court considered and rejected similar claims by journalists in Branzburg. While the empirical evidence on impact of subpoenas on journalist-source relations is arguably stronger today than it was in 1972, the "sources will dry up" argument is subject to criticism as being speculative. If a journalist's privilege were to be created, Justice White observed, this was a task for Congress or state legislatures.
