in 1975 supreme court justice potter stewart spoke to a group of reporters about freedom of the press he said "if you look at the literal language in the 1st amendment of the constitution it says congress shall pass no law abridging freedom of press. it says nothing about reporters privilege. The very fact that protections are available is attributable to the creative work of the judiciary over the last 190 years" What did stewart mean by this statement?....not what the privileges reporters do and don't have.

Question

in 1975 supreme court justice potter stewart spoke to a group of reporters about freedom of the press he said "if you look at the literal language in the 1st amendment of the constitution it says congress shall pass no law abridging freedom of press. it says nothing about reporters privilege. The very fact that protections are available is attributable to the creative work of the judiciary over the last 190 years" What did stewart mean by this statement?....not what the privileges reporters do and don't have.

Answer 1

In his statement, Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart is highlighting the role of the judiciary in interpreting and expanding the protections for freedom of the press, despite the absence of explicit mention in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Stewart starts by pointing out that the First Amendment states "Congress shall pass no law abridging freedom of the press," but it does not specifically mention any privileges for reporters. By emphasizing the literal language of the amendment, he highlights that the text itself does not provide clear and explicit directives regarding privileges for the press.

However, Stewart goes on to explain that despite the absence of explicit language regarding reporter privileges, protections for the press have evolved and been recognized over time due to the "creative work of the judiciary" over nearly two centuries.

This statement reflects Stewart's recognition of the judiciary's historical role in interpreting the Constitution and applying it to specific cases. He suggests that while the First Amendment may not explicitly mention reporter privileges, the judiciary has played a crucial role in recognizing and expanding these protections, emphasizing that the judiciary has been instrumental in shaping the legal landscape regarding freedom of the press.

In essence, Stewart is acknowledging the role of the judiciary in recognizing and safeguarding the protections for the press, even though they are not explicitly outlined in the text of the First Amendment.