Appeals court temporarily halts protections for journalists, legal observers in Portland

[Mr. Invisible]

A three-judge panel on Thursday temporarily halted protections for journalists and legal observers covering the unrest In Portland, Oregon.Last week, federal Judge Michael Simon ruled that journalists and legal observers were exempt from federal officers' physical force, arrest or other treatment if the officers "reasonably know" that a person is a journalist or legal observer.

But in a 2-1 decision, the judges on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, agreed with the government that Judge Simon’s initial ruling was too broad.

}“Given the order’s breadth and lack of clarity, particularly in its non-exclusive indicia of who qualifies as “Journalists” and “Legal Observers,” appellants have also demonstrated that, in the absence of a stay, the order will cause irreparable harm to law enforcement efforts and personnel," two of the three judges wrote. "This means that journalists could be subjected to the same physical force as that of the individuals participating."

Appeals court temporarily halts protections for journalists, legal observers in Portland - ABC News

So, given the fact that there is no clear legal definition of Journalist or Legal Observer, it seems the courts have decided to unleash hell on them.

 

[Metric Mouse]

9th court has been making some interesting rulings lately. Hope everyone in Portland stays safe.

 

[JMaximus]

Appeals court temporarily halts protections for journalists, legal observers in Portland - ABC News

So, given the fact that there is no clear legal definition of Journalist or Legal Observer, it seems the courts have decided to unleash hell on them.[/FONT][/COLOR]

The natural result of everyone with a Twitter account claiming they're "from the press" to avoid accountability for their actions.

 

[Glitch]

Appeals court temporarily halts protections for journalists, legal observers in Portland - ABC News

So, given the fact that there is no clear legal definition of Journalist or Legal Observer, it seems the courts have decided to unleash hell on them.[/FONT][/COLOR]

Journalism has been long dead in the US. All we have are anti-American propagandists. Therefore, no protections are required. If the COPs are beating the crap out of someone, they can be assured that it is not a journalist.

 

[Deuce]

The natural result of everyone with a Twitter account claiming they're "from the press" to avoid accountability for their actions.

Their actions of... filming in a public area? You think CNN should be held accountable for that?

 

[dcsports]

Appeals court temporarily halts protections for journalists, legal observers in Portland - ABC News

So, given the fact that there is no clear legal definition of Journalist or Legal Observer, it seems the courts have decided to unleash hell on them.[/FONT][/COLOR]

That's incorrect. Journalists have the same protections they had before the ruling, and enjoy elsewhere in the country.

It does mean that if there is a violent mob that police are trying to disperse they won't have to try to identify and carve out a poorly defined group of people. The answer for journalists would be to not participate in violent mobs, and if they do, understand that they stand the same risks as others in that mob.

 

[Napoleon]

Their actions of... filming in a public area? You think CNN should be held accountable for that?

Well we all know what happened to that Wisconsin State Senator.

 

[JMaximus]

Their actions of... filming in a public area? You think CNN should be held accountable for that?

Their actions of participating in a violent riot...

:wassat1:

 

[Deuce]

Their actions of participating in a violent riot...

:wassat1:

By "participating in" you mean "standing in the general area with a camera?"

Can you cite which law this violates?

 

[lwf]

Journalism has been long dead in the US. All we have are anti-American propagandists. Therefore, no protections are required. If the COPs are beating the crap out of someone, they can be assured that it is not a journalist.

Sounds like fascism.

 

[apdst]

As long as the journalists aren't participating in the insurgency, there's nothing for them to worry about.

 

[lwf]

As long as the journalists aren't participating in the insurgency, there's nothing for them to worry about.

If only that were true.

 

[snakestretcher]

Sounds like fascism.

That's one of the first thing the Nazis did; shut down the free press because it was 'anti-German' and allowed only the official Nazi party organ; the Volkischer Beobachter. Trump's wet dream, along with his oft-stated desire to be president for life.

Nazi Propaganda and Censorship | The Holocaust Encyclopedia

 

[JMaximus]

By "participating in" you mean "standing in the general area with a camera?"

Can you cite which law this violates?

Can you quote me claiming there are any laws being violated?

 

[Deuce]

As long as the journalists aren't participating in the insurgency, there's nothing for them to worry about.

Tell that to the journalist who lost an eye.

 

[apdst]

Tell that to the journalist who lost an eye.

She knew the risks.

 

[Manc Skipper]

Tell that to the journalist who lost an eye.

Or those actively targeted or arrested despite accreditation.

 

[Manc Skipper]

She knew the risks.

What are the risks of being a reporter in a law abiding free country?

 

[Deuce]

She knew the risks.

Half an hour ago you said she had nothing to worry about.

 

[apdst]

What are the risks of being a reporter in a law abiding free country?

If you're in the middle of a riot, there's a risk of getting injured. There's no argument that will change that reality.

 

[Deuce]

If you're in the middle of a riot, there's a risk of getting injured. There's no argument that will change that reality.

A police officer aimed a weapon at her head and pulled the trigger, stop acting like this was some random event.

 

[apdst]

Half an hour ago you said she had nothing to worry about.

I said if they didn't participate in the riot, they didn't have to worry about being arrested. If you put yourself in the line of fire though, you're exposing yourself to the risk of being injured.

 

[apdst]

A police officer aimed a weapon at her head and pulled the trigger, stop acting like this was some random event.

You have no way of knowing that.

 

[Deuce]

I said if they didn't participate in the riot, they didn't have to worry about being arrested. If you put yourself in the line of fire though, you're exposing yourself to the risk of being injured.

So, again, by "participate in the riot" you mean "stand anywhere in the area."

 

[Deuce]

You have no way of knowing that.

It's how guns work, apdst. The bullet goes where you point the barrel.