- Gentlemen, start your drones: Judge’s ruling opens door for commercial use
- Soldier who hid, bragged about not saluting flag to be punished — in secret
- ‘Maverick’ of the seas: ‘Top Gun’ school for U.S. ship officers to launch
- Putin declares Sochi Paralympics open amid Ukrainian protest
- ‘In Jesus name, we pray’ sparks ire at Ohio council meeting
- Navy’s first laser weapon ready for prime time; drone killer to deploy this summer
- Billionaire backer: Rick Santorum ‘needs to be heard’ in 2016
- Obamacare fallout: 49 percent pessimistic; 45 percent ‘scared’
- DHS accused of holding U.S. citizen at airport, using emails to pry into her sex life
- Seattle socialist: Minimum-wage discussion skewed by ‘right-wing’ GAO analysis
No ‘right’ for media to embed with troops
There is no constitutional right allowing journalists to cover troops in a war zone, a U.S. appeals court in Washington ruled yesterday.
The ruling came in a suit brought by publisher Larry Flynt and Hustler magazine over access to U.S. troops in Afghanistan.
Mr. Flynt contended that there was a “First Amendment right of the news media to have access to U.S. troops in combat operations,” and that the Pentagon’s delay in allowing Hustler correspondents access to the troops in Afghanistan violated that right.
Mr. Flynt requested, in an October 2001 letter to the Defense Department, that Hustler correspondents “be permitted to accompany ground troops on combat missions and that said correspondents be allowed free access” to the theater of operations in Afghanistan.
At the time, the United States was preparing to invade Afghanistan, where the fundamentalist Taliban regime was sheltering Osama bin Laden and other leaders of al Qaeda.
Eventually, a Pentagon official sent Mr. Flynt to the Fifth Fleet Public Affairs Office, and after a further exchange of letters, a Hustler correspondent was allowed into Afghanistan.
But Mr. Flynt sued the Pentagon for its restrictive access and for the delay in allowing his correspondent access to the theater of war. The publisher and magazine sought an injunction to force the Pentagon to revise its policy.
A federal judge dismissed the suit, saying the controversy was not “ripe” — the dispute was still being worked out — and questioning Hustler’s “standing.”
In order to have “standing” to bring a suit, a plaintiff must show some injury.
The appeals court yesterday also ruled against Mr. Flynt, but on different and more sweeping grounds — one that might have impact on news organizations as a whole.
” … We find that there is no constitutional right for the media to embed with U.S. military forces in combat,” the appeals court said in part.
Taxpayers must pay the freight for over-budget train projects
- CPAC 2014: Rand Paul urges conservatives to fight for liberty
- Putin has transformed Russian army into a lean, mean fighting machine
- Soldier who hid to avoid saluting the flag to be punished in secret; Army won't release details
- Kim Jong-un calls for execution of 33 Christians
- EDITORIAL: Connecticut revolts against gun controls that could criminalize 300,000
- U.S. pilot scares off Iranians with 'Top Gun'-worthy stunt: 'You really ought to go home'
- Bill Clinton poses for photo with Bunny Ranch prostitutes
- Malaysia Airlines says plane on route to Beijing missing
- High schooler suing parents for money shot down by judge
- SAUERBREY: Taxing Marylanders until they flee
Pope Francis meets his 'mini-me'
Celebrity deaths in 2014
Winter storm hits states — again