Court says Sports Illustrated not protected by shield law

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#1
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nation/20050716-0558-sportsillustrated-shield.html

By John Zenor
ASSOCIATED PRESS


5:58 a.m. July 16, 2005


MONTGOMERY, Ala. – A federal appeals court ruled that Alabama's shield law does not protect Sports Illustrated from having to identify a confidential source for a defamation suit against the magazine.

But the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Friday that attorneys for University of Alabama football coach Mike Price, who is suing the magazine, must question several women under oath before the magazine would be required to disclose its source. The court said the anonymous source the magazine relied upon is "almost certainly" one of three women whose names have surfaced in the case.

The 2003 story quoted the source as saying Price had sex with two women in a hotel after getting drunk at a topless bar in Pensacola, Fla. Price has admitted having too much to drink but denied the magazine's report about having sex.

The three-judge panel, siding with a lower court, held that Alabama's law specifically mentions protecting newspapers and broadcasters from disclosing confidential sources, but does not mention magazines and therefore does not cover them.

Rick McCabe, a Sports Illustrated spokesman, said they are "disappointed that the court concluded that the Alabama shield law does not apply to magazines."

Price attorney Stephen Heninger called the ruling "a huge decision for us" and said one of the three women cited by the court – Lori "Destiny" Boudreaux – has already told him she was the source in a sworn affidavit.

"She was the confidential source. She will say that. That's what we wanted all along," Heninger said.

Attempts to locate Boudreaux, who had been a dancer at the topless club, Artey's Angels, were not immediately successful.

The ruling comes only days after Time Inc., the parent company of Sports Illustrated, turned over the e-mail and notes of one of its Time magazine reporters after losing a federal court fight to protect its confidential source in a story about disclosing a CIA officer's identity. Price was fired as Alabama's coach because of his night of partying. He is now head coach at Texas-El Paso.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Not sure, but I think this could have a profound effect on how SI is able to gather their stories if their sources cannot be protected under shield laws.
 
#3
That's terrible. I think its just an unfortunate omission in the Shield law itself. I highly doubt magazines was left out of the protection intentionally while newspapers and broadcasters were included. I think we will definitely be seeing less gritty stories from SI in the near future, at least.
 
Last edited:

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#4
If I'm interpreting it correctly, this ruling only applies to Alabama's shield law.

Other state shield laws are different. For example, in California:

The Shield Law protects a "publisher, editor, reporter, or other person connected with or employed unpon a newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication, or by a press association or wire service" and a "radio or television news reporter or other person connected with or employed by a radio or television station." The Shield Law also likely applies to stringers, freelancers, and perhaps authors.
http://www.thefirstamendment.org/shieldlaw.html

I think what we're going to see is a push for amendments to the law in those states with clauses similar to Alabama's.
 
#5
I can't see an amendment like that getting too far. It would be extremely politicized, naturally bringing up the Rove situation, and not actually reflect concern for good journalism.

On the other hand, I can't imagine the necessity for SI to continue publishing stories about coaches' sex lives. Maybe I just don't have a good enough imagination...
 

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#6
I think you're misunderstanding, captain bill. This isn't a federal law; it's up to each state to determine it's own shield laws. As I showed above, the California law - for example - DOES include magazines. It's very likely Alabama will introduce legislation to amend theirs.

The ability of journalists to protect their sources is a keystone of a free press. The Shield Law protects journalists from being prosecuted for protecting those sources.
 
#7
VF21 said:
I think you're misunderstanding, captain bill. This isn't a federal law; it's up to each state to determine it's own shield laws. As I showed above, the California law - for example - DOES include magazines. It's very likely Alabama will introduce legislation to amend theirs.

The ability of journalists to protect their sources is a keystone of a free press. The Shield Law protects journalists from being prosecuted for protecting those sources.
I know, and I was saying that that amendment in Alabama, at least right now, could be viewed in a very political light in the Alabama legislature.

Then again, the public really doesn't seem to care about Rove, so easily not. And I was joking about needing to protect SI's sex stories, just because it really amused me that this situation arose in the way it did.
 

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#8
Newspapers are covered, magazines not? That's either drawing a mighty fine and spurious) line or that's some incredibly sloppy drafting.


Also interesting from a legal standpoint that SI would face a different legal climate depending on every state it is sold in (since I safely assume its not an Alabama corporation). Odd actually. Want to find out a source? Go forum shopping until you find a state that will let you sue them.