Judge upholds reporter's right to protect sources

For once a California Judge made the right decision. I always thought that if a Reporter had to reveal His or Her source that nobody would ever say anything again to a Reporter.

I disagree. I can fully understand a journalist wanting to protect his sources, plus I'm a firm believer in First Amendment Rights. However, I don't believe this ruling should be written in stone. Because in my opine, a balance must always be weighed between national security, and gossip, with our nation's security on top. I don't believe freedom of a/the press should EVER prevail over national security, nor do I believe a so called free press should be the eyes and ears for our enemies.

"...a balance ... with nation's security on top." is no balance. That's why justice incarnate is blindfolded. Search keyword "security theater".

This is JUDICIAL TYRANNY PEOPLE. The constitution offers protections for FREE SPEECH, EXCEPT in the case of National Security and Classified information. Look it up you dopes. This judge ignored the US Constitution...this is tyranny plain and simple.

HOORAY for First Amendment. OsiSpeaks.com

By the way , Do reporters possess Security Clearences? NO. What is classified information? information if revealed will result in death of US Government or Military personnel and jeopardize our national command structure. So, let me get this straight, a reporter should feel free to KNOIW this information and then RELEASE it on the OPEN Media (to even our enemies), and you MORONS think this was a sane decision? My God this is proof positive there is no hope for us.

No hope that is unless we arm up, as freedom loving, constitution loving Americans, like our FOUNDERS did and kick the TRAITORS OUT if not KILL THEM on site..see they are anti-war, anti-America pussies, who obviously seek to destroy America, they are a threat, and that is the reason our founders gave us the SECOND AMENDMENT, to to get rid of the tyrants by ANY MEANS NECESSARY...in the words of John Adams himself!

It's like this: is the "leaked" information about something illegal or immoral? If not then it doesn't need to be leaked and if so, then the leaker needs to report it to the General Council, OPM, the Justice Department; whoever they want to look into it via official channels. Too many people want to be one a "source in the _____" insert whichever agency you want. The issue is just more complex than some of these people on here would like to think. A free press is necessary to the survival of our nation. But there is a difference between "America must know what is going on" and "I'm going to get a Pulitzer for disclosing this highly classified information." I like Bill Gertz. His big deal is that he believes the nation needs an independent Counter-Intelligence Agency rather than each agency having their own internal branch. That's what is at the center of this case; how the government is repeatedly infiltrated or corrupted by foreign intelligence agencies and most Americans have no clue. But on the other hand, Bill Gertz isn't in possession of all the facts, perhaps he blew some perfectly good counter-intelligence operations. Who knows.