reason.com
Nov. 4, 2022
Nov. 4, 2022
It has been five years since police in Laredo, Texas, mocked and jeered at Priscilla Villarreal, a local journalist often critical of cops, as she stood in the Webb County Jail while they booked her on federal charges. Her crime: asking the government questions.
That may seem like a relatively obvious violation of the First Amendment. Yet perhaps more fraught is that, after all this time, the federal courts have still not been able to reach a consensus on that question. Over the years, judges in the 5th Circuit have ping-ponged back and forth over whether jailing a journalist for doing journalism does, in fact, plainly infringe on her free speech rights.
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas awarded those officers qualified immunity, the legal doctrine that allows state and local government officials to violate your constitutional rights without having to face federal civil suits if that violation has not been "clearly established" in case law. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit forcefully overturned that: "If [this] is not an obvious violation of the Constitution, it's hard to imagine what would be," wrote Judge James C. Ho.
Last week, the full spate of judges on the 5th Circuit voted to rehear the case in a rare move that signals some discontent with Ho's majority conclusion. Put differently, it's not looking good for Villarreal, nor for any journalist in the 5th Circuit who would like to do their job without fear of going to jail for it.
In April 2017, Villarreal, who reports near the U.S.-Mexico border, broke a story about a Border Patrol agent who committed suicide. A month later, she released the surname of a family involved in a fatal car accident. The agency that confirmed both pieces of information: the Laredo Police Department. The agency that would bring felony charges against her six months later for those acts of journalism: the Laredo Police Department.
At the core of Villarreal's misfortune is a Texas law that allows the state to prosecute someone who obtains nonpublic information from a government official if he or she does so "with intent to obtain a benefit." Villarreal operates her popular news-sharing operation on Facebook, where her page, Lagordiloca News, has amassed 200,000 followers as of this writing.
That may seem like a relatively obvious violation of the First Amendment. Yet perhaps more fraught is that, after all this time, the federal courts have still not been able to reach a consensus on that question. Over the years, judges in the 5th Circuit have ping-ponged back and forth over whether jailing a journalist for doing journalism does, in fact, plainly infringe on her free speech rights.
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas awarded those officers qualified immunity, the legal doctrine that allows state and local government officials to violate your constitutional rights without having to face federal civil suits if that violation has not been "clearly established" in case law. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit forcefully overturned that: "If [this] is not an obvious violation of the Constitution, it's hard to imagine what would be," wrote Judge James C. Ho.
Last week, the full spate of judges on the 5th Circuit voted to rehear the case in a rare move that signals some discontent with Ho's majority conclusion. Put differently, it's not looking good for Villarreal, nor for any journalist in the 5th Circuit who would like to do their job without fear of going to jail for it.
In April 2017, Villarreal, who reports near the U.S.-Mexico border, broke a story about a Border Patrol agent who committed suicide. A month later, she released the surname of a family involved in a fatal car accident. The agency that confirmed both pieces of information: the Laredo Police Department. The agency that would bring felony charges against her six months later for those acts of journalism: the Laredo Police Department.
At the core of Villarreal's misfortune is a Texas law that allows the state to prosecute someone who obtains nonpublic information from a government official if he or she does so "with intent to obtain a benefit." Villarreal operates her popular news-sharing operation on Facebook, where her page, Lagordiloca News, has amassed 200,000 followers as of this writing.
So to jail Villarreal, police alleged that she ran afoul of that law when she retrieved information from Laredo Police Department Officer Barbara Goodman and proceeded to publish those two aforementioned stories, because she potentially benefited by gaining more Facebook followers. Missing from that analysis is that every journalist, reporter, or media pundit has an "intent to benefit" when she or he publishes a story, whether it is to attract viewers, readers, or subscribers. Soliciting information from government officials—who, as Villarreal's case exemplifies, sometimes feed reporters information – is called a "scoop," and it's not new.
Yet it was an argument that, in some sense, resonated with Judge Priscilla Richman, the chief jurist on the 5th Circuit, who almost certainly voted in favor of reconsidering the court's ruling. "In fact, Villareal's [sic] Complaint says that she 'sometimes enjoys a free meal from appreciative readers, . . . occasionally receives fees for promoting a local business [and] has used her Facebook page [where all of her reporting is published] to ask for donations for new equipment necessary to continue her citizen journalism efforts," she wrote in August, rebuking Ho's conclusion. "With great respect, the majority opinion is off base in holding that no reasonably competent officer could objectively have thought that Villareal [sic] obtained information from her back-door source within the Laredo Police Department with an 'intent to benefit.'"
Such an interpretation would render the media industry an illegal operation, and everyone who participates—whether they be conservative, liberal, far-left, far-right, or anything in-between—criminals. "Other journalists are paid full salaries by their media outlets," writes Ho. Can confirm. Is that somehow less consequential than receiving free lunch or getting a new spike of followers on a social media platform (which is something that many journalists employed full time also set out to do)? "In sum, it is a crime to be a journalist in Texas, thanks to the dissent's reading of § 39.06(c)," Ho adds.
Debates around free speech are often polarized along predictable partisan lines. More specifically, they're often polarized by the content espoused. It's an easy task to support the idea of free speech when you enjoy what's being said. But the First Amendment does not pertain solely to popular speech, which, by nature of common sense, needs considerably less protection than the content deemed unpopular by the majority.
"It's not about just one person, it's not about just one case," says J.T. Morris, a senior attorney at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), which is representing Villarreal. "It's about the First Amendment rights of all citizens to ask their public officials questions."
This appears to be something Judge Ho understands. Appointed by President Donald Trump, he has drawn headlines in recent weeks for his critiques of cancel culture at Yale Law School, where left-leaning students have developed a reputation for petulantly shouting down those with differing views.
Yet it was an argument that, in some sense, resonated with Judge Priscilla Richman, the chief jurist on the 5th Circuit, who almost certainly voted in favor of reconsidering the court's ruling. "In fact, Villareal's [sic] Complaint says that she 'sometimes enjoys a free meal from appreciative readers, . . . occasionally receives fees for promoting a local business [and] has used her Facebook page [where all of her reporting is published] to ask for donations for new equipment necessary to continue her citizen journalism efforts," she wrote in August, rebuking Ho's conclusion. "With great respect, the majority opinion is off base in holding that no reasonably competent officer could objectively have thought that Villareal [sic] obtained information from her back-door source within the Laredo Police Department with an 'intent to benefit.'"
Such an interpretation would render the media industry an illegal operation, and everyone who participates—whether they be conservative, liberal, far-left, far-right, or anything in-between—criminals. "Other journalists are paid full salaries by their media outlets," writes Ho. Can confirm. Is that somehow less consequential than receiving free lunch or getting a new spike of followers on a social media platform (which is something that many journalists employed full time also set out to do)? "In sum, it is a crime to be a journalist in Texas, thanks to the dissent's reading of § 39.06(c)," Ho adds.
Debates around free speech are often polarized along predictable partisan lines. More specifically, they're often polarized by the content espoused. It's an easy task to support the idea of free speech when you enjoy what's being said. But the First Amendment does not pertain solely to popular speech, which, by nature of common sense, needs considerably less protection than the content deemed unpopular by the majority.
"It's not about just one person, it's not about just one case," says J.T. Morris, a senior attorney at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), which is representing Villarreal. "It's about the First Amendment rights of all citizens to ask their public officials questions."
This appears to be something Judge Ho understands. Appointed by President Donald Trump, he has drawn headlines in recent weeks for his critiques of cancel culture at Yale Law School, where left-leaning students have developed a reputation for petulantly shouting down those with differing views.
In our current partisan landscape, then, Villarreal might seem like an odd character for Ho to sympathize with; it's safe to say she would more likely qualify as a left-leaning hero than a right-leaning one.
The journalist doggedly covers law enforcement with profanity-laced commentary: She once published a video of an officer choking someone at a traffic stop, and railed at a district attorney who dropped criminal charges against someone for animal abuse – pattern which perhaps explains why police were eager to use the force of the law against her, the first time they ever invoked the statute in question.
But to make an about-face based on the content fundamentally confuses the meaning of free speech. Put differently, if you're upset that some students at Yale Law School are not mature enough to engage with those who think differently, or that social media vigilantes unfairly derail careers for WrongThink, then so too should you care that a woman in small-town Texas spent time in jail for promoting a message that might make you uncomfortable.
It's a problem of principle, and it's one that may also pervade the judiciary. "It should go without saying that forcing a public school student to embrace a particular political view serves no legitimate pedagogical function and is forbidden by the First Amendment," Ho wrote in Oliver v. Arnold last year.
But to make an about-face based on the content fundamentally confuses the meaning of free speech. Put differently, if you're upset that some students at Yale Law School are not mature enough to engage with those who think differently, or that social media vigilantes unfairly derail careers for WrongThink, then so too should you care that a woman in small-town Texas spent time in jail for promoting a message that might make you uncomfortable.
It's a problem of principle, and it's one that may also pervade the judiciary. "It should go without saying that forcing a public school student to embrace a particular political view serves no legitimate pedagogical function and is forbidden by the First Amendment," Ho wrote in Oliver v. Arnold last year.
The case, which went under the radar, pertained to a conservative teacher who discriminated against a liberal student, temporarily turning the discussion on bias in education on its head. That student, Mari Leigh Oliver, won – by the skin of her teeth. Seven judges wanted to rehear the case, suggesting they disagreed with the ruling, while the remaining 10 declined.
Addressing some of the judges who would side against Oliver, Ho wrote that "it's unclear why they think [other] claims should succeed, and only Oliver's should lose."
Addressing some of the judges who would side against Oliver, Ho wrote that "it's unclear why they think [other] claims should succeed, and only Oliver's should lose."
After all, the roles are typically reversed; conservatives are frequently the ones outweighed in academic settings. But if you only apply your principles when they suit you – if you only stand against the illiberal Yale students and not for the Villarreals or the Olivers – then you are sure to eventually find yourself on the losing end. And then what?
https://reason.com/2022/11/04/this-court-case-could-make-it-a-crime-to-be-a-journalist-in-texas/
https://reason.com/2022/11/04/this-court-case-could-make-it-a-crime-to-be-a-journalist-in-texas/
23 comments:
Juan so if its a crime then no wonder we barely read anything about the PUB scam/fiasco in the local papers? arrest them all.
Democrats have been violating the people s right to the 1st and 2nd amendments but now that it hits close to home you start crying! Lastly, anyone looking like that chick should no only be mocked and jeered but imprisoned for life. What’s that Halloween outfit she’s wearing?
Leftists want to jail you if you "misgender" a man who falsely believes that he is a woman. The left wants to jail you if you fail to turn your children into eunuchs. They also want to jail you if you question election results. That's what the FBI does now at the behest of Democrats.
I don't buy that benefit argument by the government.
This is a prelude to the dictatorship when Trump is inserted with his cronies to take over.
LOL
You guys aren’t journalists!
If I journal shouldn't I be a journalists? IDIOTA
Maga are a bunch of fking puss* hateful crybaby Karen's and Darren's just like Frump and his dumbass boys.
The problem with journalists is that they have been allowed to print lies to profit them selves and they’re employer(s). They are not being held accountable even though they’re lies often hurt innocent people. The Democratic Party has escalated this type of behavior. Gone are the days when a journalist was respected for providing the population with honest and trustworthy information.
Should we start complaining about the Resaca fee now or should we wait until it gets into the millions?
Chief Chapo Sauceda and the rest of The Brownsville Police Department would like to invite Ms. Villarreal to Brownsville. El Chapo has nothing else to do but to take selfies for Facebook and this would be a great way for el Chapo to once again, pose for a picture, while giving a thumbs up. What a joke of a "chief"!!!
November 5, 2022 at 4:18 PM
We are rolling in money lets wait until it gets into the billions and hire that RATA back enough is enough 60 days off is insame put him to work (STEALING of course).
y la presidenta del board hire her too and pay her a couple of million bucks a year and build her an office next to her other office at the attorney's place....paid by taxes of course...
Priscilla Villarreal is one Hot Mama. I'll take her over those "silicon Bimbos" any time of the 24/7.
Maybe you can join in on the picture too so you can sit on his thumb while you whine.
Trump is coming back and will have Joe Biden and his cokehead son incarcerated for being a bunch of crooks. As for you jotitos in Brownsville start looking for your closets. No more cross-dressing will be allowed.
@ 10:22 ponle casa Louie!
who is la bandeja in a green t? was she in track during her hs days???
Love how RGV Republicans have been drinking the cool aid like Jim Jones followers. The fake news agendas since Trump was running for president started with him and his entourage of liars making up lies and then of course his low IQ republicans and Qnon followers accepted the lies. This is how it started and continues. How about giving credit to the real liars like Fox News, Trump, republican senators like Ted Cruz, Cotton, Green, Boehbert, etc., the list is so long that I could go on and on and never finish. So now because Republicans know who the real liars are, they must make up more lies in order to look good. Well, it is too late for that. You all win the award for the biggest liars in politics. Also, you are the party that would rather get rid of our democracy and live in a country of dictatorship because that is how Trump and his republicans want to run our country. Better study how they are planning to become a dictatorship country. You will lose all your rights and your will answer to that one crazy leader like Hitler who hated everyone that was not like him. Well we all know how that ended!
They see the republican base full of pendejos and idiotas so they take advantage of all of them, hillbillys, dropouts, mental retards, jailbirds, homeless, dumpster dirvers, COCOS (of course), border line and lowlifers, low social statues, low moral character, degrading, disgraceful, disreputable, reprehensible, contemptible and vile people (mostly whites).
To: “If I journal shouldn't I be a journalists? IDIOTA“
Truly made me laugh. Like an 11 year old girl writing in her “journal…”
Tweeters and tik tockers - not journalists.
Montoyoya, you of all people should know that.
Y que le lleve mariachi. Pero tu putito te siƩntas en el pulgar.
Brownsville Police Chief Felix El Culero Sauceda doesn't even know the history of his own Department. Claiming Watson as the first SWAT Officer...wow..when another female Officer has been on the SWAT team before here and another female way before that one....El Culero Sauceda just wants the Notoriety!!!! What a Loser!
EL Culero Sauceda should talk about how Watson is assigned to the Gym with no assignment, no schedule and does not report to anyone..
Maybe El Culero Sauceda should tell the Brownsville News Paper how Watson was caught using a unmarked City Vehicle in San Antonio with her family...I'm pretty sure she was the first female to Accomplish that and not terminated!!
OH WELL Chief Felix El Culero Sauceda and and and and and and and and and The Brownsville Police Department are fullbof Sh**!!!!!!
Pinche policia lloron
Post a Comment