[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 8 (Tuesday, January 16, 2024)]
[House]
[Pages H143-H145]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROTECT REPORTERS FROM EXPLOITATIVE STATE SPYING ACT
Mr. KILEY. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill
(H.R. 4250) to maintain the free flow of information to the public by
establishing appropriate limits on the federally compelled disclosure
of information obtained as part of engaging in journalism, and for
other purposes.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 4250
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Protect Reporters from
Exploitative State Spying Act'' or the ``PRESS Act''.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Covered journalist.--The term ``covered journalist''
means a person who regularly gathers, prepares, collects,
photographs, records, writes, edits, reports, investigates,
or publishes news or information that concerns local,
national, or international events or other matters of public
interest for dissemination to the public.
(2) Covered service provider.--
(A) In general.--The term ``covered service provider''
means any person that, by an electronic means, stores,
processes, or transmits information in order to provide a
service to customers of the person.
(B) Inclusions.--The term ``covered service provider''
includes--
(i) a telecommunications carrier and a provider of an
information service (as such terms are defined in section 3
of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 153));
(ii) a provider of an interactive computer service and an
information content provider (as such terms are defined in
section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C.
230));
(iii) a provider of remote computing service (as defined in
section 2711 of title 18, United States Code); and
(iv) a provider of electronic communication service (as
defined in section 2510 of title 18, United States Code) to
the public.
(3) Document.--The term ``document'' means writings,
recordings, and photographs, as those terms are defined by
Federal Rule of Evidence 1001 (28 U.S.C. App.).
(4) Federal entity.--The term ``Federal entity'' means an
entity or employee of the judicial or executive branch or an
administrative agency of the Federal Government with the
power to issue a subpoena or issue other compulsory process.
(5) Journalism.--The term ``journalism'' means gathering,
preparing, collecting, photographing, recording, writing,
editing, reporting, investigating, or publishing news or
information that concerns local, national, or international
events or other matters of public interest for dissemination
to the public.
(6) Personal account of a covered journalist.--The term
``personal account of a covered journalist'' means an account
with a covered service provider used by a covered journalist
that is not provided, administered, or operated by the
employer of the covered journalist.
(7) Personal technology device of a covered journalist.--
The term ``personal technology device of a covered
journalist'' means a handheld communications device, laptop
computer, desktop computer, or other internet-connected
device used by a covered journalist that is not provided or
administered by the employer of the covered journalist.
(8) Protected information.--The term ``protected
information'' means any information identifying a source who
provided information as part of engaging in journalism, and
any records, contents of a communication, documents, or
information that a covered journalist obtained or created as
part of engaging in journalism.
(9) Specified offense against a minor.--The term
``specified offense against a minor'' has the meaning given
that term in section 111(7) of the Adam Walsh Child
Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (34 U.S.C. 20911(7)).
SEC. 3. LIMITS ON COMPELLED DISCLOSURE FROM COVERED
JOURNALISTS.
In any matter arising under Federal law, a Federal entity
may not compel a covered journalist to disclose protected
information, unless a court in the judicial district in which
the subpoena or other compulsory process is, or will be,
issued determines by a preponderance of the evidence, after
providing notice and an opportunity to be heard to the
covered journalist, that--
(1) disclosure of the protected information is necessary to
prevent, or to identify any perpetrator of, an act of
terrorism against the United States; or
(2) disclosure of the protected information is necessary to
prevent a threat of imminent violence, significant bodily
harm, or death, including specified offenses against a minor.
SEC. 4. LIMITS ON COMPELLED DISCLOSURE FROM COVERED SERVICE
PROVIDERS.
(a) Conditions for Compelled Disclosure.--In any matter
arising under Federal law, a Federal entity may not compel a
covered service provider to provide testimony or any document
consisting of any record, information, or other
communications stored by a covered provider on behalf of a
covered journalist, including testimony or any document
relating to a personal account of a covered journalist or a
personal technology device of a covered journalist, unless a
court in the judicial district in which the subpoena or other
compulsory process is, or will be, issued determines by a
preponderance of the evidence that there is a reasonable
threat of imminent violence unless the testimony or document
is provided, and issues an order authorizing the Federal
entity to compel the disclosure of the testimony or document.
(b) Notice to Court.--A Federal entity seeking to compel
the provision of testimony or any document described in
subsection (a) shall inform the court that the testimony or
document relates to a covered journalist.
(c) Notice to Covered Journalist and Opportunity To Be
Heard.--
(1) In general.--A court may authorize a Federal entity to
compel the provision of testimony or a document under this
section only after the Federal entity seeking the testimony
or document provides the covered journalist on behalf of whom
the testimony or document is stored pursuant to subsection
(a)--
(A) notice of the subpoena or other compulsory request for
such testimony or document from the covered service provider
not later than the time at which such subpoena or request is
issued to the covered service provider; and
(B) an opportunity to be heard before the court before the
time at which the provision of the testimony or document is
compelled.
(2) Exception to notice requirement.--
(A) In general.--Notice and an opportunity to be heard
under paragraph (1) may be delayed for not more than 45 days
if the court involved determines there is clear and
convincing evidence that such notice would pose a clear and
substantial threat to the integrity of a criminal
investigation, or would present an imminent risk of death or
serious bodily harm, including specified offenses against a
minor.
(B) Extensions.--The 45-day period described in
subparagraph (A) may be extended by the court for additional
periods of not more than 45 days if the court involved makes
a new and independent determination that there is clear and
convincing evidence that providing notice to the covered
journalist would pose a clear and substantial threat to the
integrity of a criminal investigation, or would present an
imminent risk of death or serious bodily harm, including
specified offenses against a minor, under current
circumstances.
SEC. 5. LIMITATION ON CONTENT OF INFORMATION.
The content of any testimony, document, or protected
information that is compelled under sections 3 or 4 shall--
(1) not be overbroad, unreasonable, or oppressive, and, as
appropriate, be limited to the purpose of verifying published
information or describing any surrounding circumstances
relevant to the accuracy of such published information; and
(2) be narrowly tailored in subject matter and period of
time covered so as to avoid compelling the production of
peripheral, nonessential, or speculative information.
SEC. 6. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.
Nothing in this Act shall be construed to--
(1) apply to civil defamation, slander, or libel claims or
defenses under State law, regardless of whether or not such
claims or defenses, respectively, are raised in a State or
Federal court; or
(2) prevent the Federal Government from pursuing an
investigation of a covered journalist or organization that
is--
(A) suspected of committing a crime;
(B) a witness to a crime unrelated to engaging in
journalism;
(C) suspected of being an agent of a foreign power, as
defined in section 101 of the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1801);
(D) an individual or organization designated under
Executive Order 13224 (50 U.S.C. 1701 note; relating to
blocking property and prohibiting transactions with persons
who commit, threaten to commit, or support terrorism);
(E) a specially designated terrorist, as that term is
defined in section 595.311 of title 31, Code of Federal
Regulations (or any successor thereto); or
(F) a terrorist organization, as that term is defined in
section 212(a)(3)(B)(vi)(II) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(3)(B)(vi)(II)).
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Kiley) and the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Johnson)
each will control 20 minutes.
[[Page H144]]
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
General Leave
Mr. KILEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and
to insert extraneous material on H.R. 4250.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. KILEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, today, I am presenting bipartisan legislation to protect
vital First Amendment freedoms from being infringed and chilled by
overreaching government actions. I thank my colleagues across the aisle
for their support of this issue.
This bill prohibits the Federal Government from compelling a
journalist to disclose documents, communications, or other information
obtained or created as part of the journalist's job.
Our Founders chose to enshrine the freedom of the press in the First
Amendment of the Constitution, alongside freedom of speech and other
fundamental freedoms, because it is a lynchpin of republican
government. It is vital to the functioning of a free and democratic
society.
As James Madison said: ``A popular government without popular
information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce
or a tragedy; or, perhaps both. . . . And a people who mean to be their
own governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge
gives.''
Well, the most commonly understood form of potential abuse involves
the output of a free press; that is, censorship. It is also critically
important to protect the input; that is, the work of journalists in
reporting on the affairs of the Nation. A key aspect of freedom of the
press is the pursuit of the truth without government entanglements or
intimidation.
If the government forces journalists to reveal sources or work
product, it could undermine the gathering of information that is in the
public interest. That is why 32 States and the District of Columbia
have expressly protected this right with statutory shield laws, and 49
States have either a statutory or common law privilege that protects
journalists from compelled disclosure. These laws allow journalists to
do their jobs without fear that the government will unreasonably seize
their records.
Today's legislation, the PRESS Act, does the same thing at the
Federal level. Administrations from both parties have been guilty of
unjustly targeting journalists and using compulsory processes to obtain
information from them and their sources.
Now, over the years, versions of this very bill have received
widespread support from across the political spectrum, and indeed, this
bill passed through the Judiciary Committee on a unanimous, bipartisan
vote.
Mr. Speaker, liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and
journalists are often the first to expose government fraud, waste,
abuse, and encroachments on personal freedoms.
In a free country, we need to make sure that the government cannot
unmask journalists' sources without good cause, and that is why the
need for this legislation is so strong. This bill provides those
protections, and it is long past time for this legislation to be signed
into law.
I will close by again thanking my Democrat colleagues for their
support and especially my fellow Judiciary Committee colleague, Mr.
Raskin. This bill is proof that it is possible for Congress to set
politics aside and act to protect the rights of all Americans.
Mr. Speaker, I urge support, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R.
4250, the Protect Reporters from Exploitive State Spying Act, or the
PRESS Act, and I yield myself such time as I may consume in support of
this bill.
Introduced by my colleagues, Representatives Kevin Kiley, Darrell
Issa, Harriet Hageman, Russell Fry, Jamie Raskin, and Ted Lieu, H.R.
4250 is a reporter shield law that will ensure that journalists can
engage in effective journalism while reducing the risks of putting
themselves, or their confidential sources upon whom they rely to bring
critical stories to the public's attention, in legal jeopardy.
Specifically, H.R. 4250 would create a strong but qualified Federal
statutory privilege that protects journalists from being compelled by
the Federal Government to reveal confidential sources and information.
The bill also allows the government to defeat this privilege under
certain circumstances where a court determines that the disclosure is
necessary to prevent or identify any perpetrator of an act of terrorism
or to prevent a threat of imminent violence, significant bodily harm or
death, and then only after the journalist is provided notice and an
opportunity to be heard before the court.
Additionally, the bill prohibits the Federal Government from
compelling an electronic service provider that stores a journalist's
information to disclose that information, as well as information
relating to the journalist's personal account or technology device to
the government. The government can defeat this privilege only if a
court determines that there is a reasonable threat of imminent violence
absent the information's disclosure and subject to notice and other
requirements and exceptions.
Lastly, the PRESS Act contains a rule of construction that provides
that the act should not be construed to apply to civil defamation,
slander, libel claims, or defenses under State law. The rule of
construction also makes clear that the act does not prevent the Federal
Government from pursuing an investigation of a journalist or
organization that is suspected of engaging in criminal or terrorist
activity, is a witness to a crime unrelated to journalism, or is
suspected of being an agent of a foreign power.
This is necessary and long-overdue legislation. Over the past several
decades, Democratic and Republican Presidential administrations have
attempted to crack down on leaks of classified information to media
outlets, and these investigations have included efforts to obtain
journalists' records.
In 2021, the Washington Post, the New York Times, and CNN reported
that the Department of Justice, under the Trump administration, sought
the information and records of their reporters. Previously, during the
Obama administration, the Department reportedly searched FOX News
reporter Jeffrey Rosen's emails and even listed him as a co-conspirator
in an Espionage Act case against the source of leaked information.
These and other recent episodes further illustrate the need for
stronger protections for journalists and their sources.
Indeed, one of the most critical roles that the free press plays in
our democracy is to keep the public informed about the functioning of
government and the policymaking process, including allegations of
government wrongdoing or incompetence. Yet, the press' ability to carry
out this role would be seriously eroded if a reporter could not obtain
complete and accurate information about such wrongdoing or incompetence
by assuring confidential sources their anonymity.
The PRESS Act would protect a journalist's ability to bring these
important stories to the public's attention, stories which almost
always hinge on protecting the identity of confidential sources without
unwarranted interference by the Federal Government.
{time} 1730
The lack of a Federal press shield law is quite striking given the
broad and bipartisan support for such laws.
Currently, over 40 States and the District of Columbia have enacted
press shield laws or otherwise afford similar privileges through their
State constitutions or common law.
Here in Congress, there is longstanding and bipartisan support for a
Federal press shield law. For example, former Vice President Mike
Pence, when he was a Member of Congress back in 2005, introduced the
Free Flow of Information Act, which was very similar in concept to H.R.
4250.
The Free Flow of Information Act subsequently passed the House twice
in the 110th and the 111th Congresses, the first time by a 398-21 vote,
and the second time by voice vote under suspension of the rules.
Last Congress, the House passed the PRESS Act by voice vote under
suspension of the rules, as well.
[[Page H145]]
In this Congress, the bill passed the Judiciary Committee by a 23-0
vote, and, unfortunately, despite this history of broad bipartisan
support, the Senate has never acted on any of these bills, though hope
springs eternal.
I am encouraged that, even as stark differences among Members of this
body remain, this important legislation continues to enjoy bipartisan
support.
I thank Chairman Jordan for his work in helping to bring H.R. 4250 to
the floor today, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes.''
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. KILEY. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers. I am prepared to
close, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my
time to close.
Mr. Speaker, I note that the PRESS Act is endorsed by a number of
First Amendment and press freedom organizations, including the ACLU,
the Center for Democracy and Technology, the Committee to Protect
Journalists, Demand Progress, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the
First Amendment Coalition, the Freedom of the Press Foundation, the
Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, the National
Association of Broadcasters, PEN America, the Protect The 1st
Foundation, the Radio Television Digital News Association, and the
Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 4250, a
necessary and long overdue Federal protection for journalists and their
sources.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. KILEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his remarks. I
again thank Mr. Raskin for working with me on this legislation, as well
as Chair Jordan and Ranking Member Nadler for helping to get it through
the Judiciary Committee with unanimous bipartisan support.
I very much look forward to seeing this bill get to the President's
desk and get signed into law this year. I urge all of my colleagues
here in the House to support it.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Kiley) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 4250.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. KILEY. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not
present.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on this question will be postponed.
The point of no quorum is considered withdrawn.
____________________