And the argument here could clearly be used to enable the prosecution of those who leak national security secrets to papers like the New York Times and Washington Post.

Five reporters must testify about their law enforcement sources in a former Army scientist’s lawsuit against the Justice Department, a federal judge in Washington ruled yesterday.

The suit, filed by Steven J. Hatfill, a bioterrorism expert, contends that the government violated the federal Privacy Act by providing journalists with information about him in the F.B.I.’s investigation of the deadly anthrax mailings in 2001.

The reporters — Michael Isikoff and Daniel Klaidman of Newsweek; Allan Lengel of The Washington Post; Toni Locy, formerly of USA Today; and James Stewart, formerly of CBS News — have acknowledged receiving information from the Justice Department and the F.B.I. about Dr. Hatfill, the judge, Reggie B. Walton, wrote in his decision yesterday. But they have refused to name their sources.

Judge Walton, of the Federal District Court in Washington, said Dr. Hatfill was entitled to the sources’ names because “the information sought is clearly central to his Privacy Act claims.”

“Denying civil litigants access to the identity of government officials who have allegedly leaked information to reporters would effectively leave Privacy Act violations immune from judicial condemnation,” Judge Walton wrote, “while leaving potential leakers virtually undeterred from engaging in such misbehavior.”

Look at the quote from Judge Walton's ruling. It is no great logical leap to argue that denying federal prosecutors access to the identity of government officials who have allegedly leaked information to reporters would effectively leave Espionage Act violations immune from judicial condemnation while leaving potential leakers undeterred from engaging in such misbehavior.

We as a nation have to decide upon a simple question -- are journalists (however broadly or narrowly you want to define that term) subject to the same laws and obligations as other Americans? If they are, the notion of a press shield or a reporter's privilege undermines such a principle. A reporter with special knowledge of a crime must be obligated to cooperate with authorities -- and if, as journalists claim, that hinders their ability to get a story because folks are deterred from breaking the law, that is a positive impact of that practice.

A different take at Michelle Malkin & Captain Ed

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, The Virtuous Republic, Rosemary's Thoughts, Adam's Blog, Big Dog's Weblog, Inside the Northwest Territory, Nuke's News & Views, Webloggin, Leaning Straight Up, The Amboy Times, The Florida Masochist, Conservative Cat, Adeline and Hazel, Public Domain Clip Art, Pursuing Holiness, Conservative Thoughts, third world county, Faultline USA, Wake Up America, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, 4 Time Father?, Pirate's Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Planck's Constant, Gone Hollywood, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.