Muse

Want to turn challenges into chances? Go digital enterprise and adapt to every change by combining the real and digital worlds. Transform the everyday with Siemens. When everything is moving all at once, your workforce, your tech stack, your business, you don't need more tools. You need one solution. That's why Paylocity built a single platform to connect HR, finance, and IT with AI-driven insights and automated workflows that simplify the complex and power what's next. Because when everything comes together in one place, growth comes easy. Experience one place for all your HCM needs. Start now at paylocity.com slash one.

Hey folks, did you know that Senator Chuck Schumer was booed at a New York City pride parade? Whether you knew that or not may actually depend on where you get your news. According to Ground News, if you primarily read left-leaning or centrist news sources, you're dramatically less likely to have seen that story than if you mostly rely on conservative news sources. That's one of the reasons I use Ground News. Ground News, in addition to being the sponsor of this episode of the Lawfare Podcast, is an app that lets you jump out of your media bubbles and see the blind spots that exist. in whatever media ecosystem you operate. Ground News doesn't just show you what the news is. It shows you who's reporting the news, how many news sources are covering it, and how coverage is distributed across the political spectrum. And it gives you insights into where your own blind spots might be based on the sources you actually read. The blind spot feed is one of my favorite features because it highlights stories that are receiving disproportionate attention from one side of the media ecosystem relative to others. I also appreciate that it doesn't stop at showing you who covered a story. Ground News also shows how many outlets reported the story, how coverage breaks down ideologically, who owns each publication, and the factuality and bias ratings for those outlets. For example, Ground news shows that there are 50 different sources reporting that Oman warned allies that ships going through the Straits of Hormuz might have to pay a fee. And the headlines are quite different depending on where you look. From right-leaning news sources, you get headlines like ships face voluntary charges under plan for post-war Hormuz. From more left-leaning outlets, you get headlines like Oman tells allies ships going through Hormuz may have to pay. And further, Brown News shows that only 19% of the news organizations covering the story are left-leaning, and only 12% are centrist. 69% of the news sources covering it are conservative. In other words, you're much less likely to have encountered that story if you primarily read left-leaning outlets than if you read conservative media. Brown News helps you jump out of your media bubbles and get closer to the ground truth. It's not a publisher, and it's much more than an aggregator. It's a combination of a rating system and a focused look at who is reporting what. I have to say I was skeptical of it at first, but I've come to appreciate it. Like Lawfare, Brown News is about bringing you high-quality information that you

figure out what to do with. For me, the most valuable feature is simply discovering the stories I probably would have missed because of my own media habits. So check out Ground News and subscribe to the Vantage Plan for 40% off, which gives you unlimited access to a better way to read the news. Visit groundnews.com slash law. That's groundnews.com slash law. One last time, It's really worth checking out groundnews.com slash law.

Force One and their confidential sources. The New York Times has accused the Trump administration of violating the First Amendment rights of its reporters and filed a motion to quash the subpoenas on July 15th. The Justice Department, in contrast, has argued the subpoenas are necessary as part of its investigation into leaks that harm national security. For today's archive, I chose an episode of from August 25, 2023, in which Tyler McBrien sat down with Caitlin Vavogas, Deputy Director of Advocacy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation, to discuss an instance in which a small newspaper in Marion, Texas, was raided by local police. They spoke about what caused the incident and considered the broader chilling effect that occurs when journalists are brought into active investigations, how to protect press freedom, and more.

i'm tyler mcbryan managing editor of lawfare and this is the lawfare podcast august 25th 2023 earlier this month there was big trouble in little marion kansas where an entire police department rated the offices of the marion county record a small family-owned newspaper about 60 miles north of wichita with seven employees and a circulation of about 4 000 to discuss this alarming violation of press freedoms. I sat down with Caitlin Vogus, Deputy Director of Advocacy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation. We talked about what motivated the raid, how it went down, and the chilling effect this kind of thing can have on small-town newspapers and big media organizations alike. We also discussed what journalists, from lone freelancers to sizable newsrooms, can do to protect themselves from all manner of press freedom violations. It's the Lawfare Podcast, August 25th, a chilling violation of press freedoms in Marion, Kansas. Now, Caitlin, many of our listeners will be familiar with the story of what happened in Marion, Kansas. But for those who have maybe just read the headlines, can you tell us a bit about where Marion, Kansas is and what happened there earlier this month?

Sure. So Marion is a small town that's about an hour outside of Wichita. And earlier this month on August 11th, almost the entire police force showed up at the newsroom of the local newspaper, the Marion County Record, with a search warrant. And they raided the newsroom. They took nearly every piece of equipment in the newsroom, things like computers, reporter's cell phone, they took the newsroom server, and they also took documents as well. And on the same day, they showed up at the home of the newsroom's publisher and co-owner, Eric Meyer, where he lived with his mother, Joanne Meyer, who was also a co-owner of the newspaper, and they searched the home as well. And they took equipment from there and they looked through documents in the home. They also showed up at the house of a local city councilwoman and they searched the house of the councilwoman too. And what we know now is that the raids were connected to a story that the record was working on about a prominent local restaurant owner. And the reporters at the record were extremely disturbed by the raids. They were quite intimidating. And they also really stymied the paper's ability to publish because when the police took all of their equipment, it meant that they didn't have what they needed to put out the next edition of the paper. And since they didn't have their server, they didn't have the copy of the ads or the stories that they needed for the next edition of the paper. But most tragically of all, that co-owner of the paper, Joanne Meyer, who was 98 years old, passed away the day after the raid. And her son, Eric, said that the shock in distress she experienced as a result of having her house raided by police contributed to her death. So it's an extremely disturbing and shocking and outrageous press freedom violation

that happened earlier this month. Yeah, it's really important and tragic aspect of the story. So thank you for walking us through that. And before we get into the raid and the ripple effects and also more of the lead up, can you give the listeners a sense of the record itself? What kind of paper? Was it? Who does it serve? Maybe any history, its circulation, that kind of thing.

The Record is a small local paper. It has a circulation of about 4,000 people. It's a community newspaper, and it covers stories of importance to the local community, whether that's local businesses or local politics. And like so many local newspapers, it's really the lifeblood of a small town. And one of the main news sources that people in that community use to find out what's happening with their neighbors and what's happening with their elected officials.

And I want to go back to the raid itself and the motivations behind it. I was a bit surprised to hear that one of the motivations was about a prominent local restaurant owner, a private citizen, rather than perhaps an investigation into someone on the force. So can you explain that motivation and that connection with the restaurant owner? And then I'm also curious about the legality of the raid. I understand that the local judge signed a warrant, but how did this

happen, essentially. Sure. So the record received a tip from a confidential source about this local restaurant owner. The confidential source provided a record that showed that the restaurant owner had been previously convicted of a DUI. And the source said that the owner was continuing to drive without a license, despite the fact that she had been convicted of a DUI. And when the record got that tip, they investigated it, as any good journalist would do. They verified it by using a state government website where you can look up people's driver's information using things like their driver's license number. And they confirmed the accuracy of the information. But nevertheless, they decided initially at least not to publish the story because they had some concerns about where their information was coming from and whether or not the restaurant owner who was involved in a contentious divorce, maybe it was her ex-husband who was providing the information or something along those lines. So what the paper actually did was they called the police and they said, hey, you should check this out. You should look into this. We received this information and it's something you should know. And it wasn't until the restaurant owner actually spoke publicly about the conviction and accused the paper of going after her at a city council meeting that the paper then published a story on the DUI convictions and denied that they were doing anything improper with respect to her, but actually went ahead and published that story. And it was just shortly after that, that the police went ahead and raided the newspaper. And obviously, you were not there

at the time of the raid, but reporting since then has come out sort of describing the raid. Do you have a sense of what it looked like, you know, an entire police force showing up at a small newspaper's office and then, you know, the home of the owner? I understand that that video surfaced of at least the raid of the home. Can you paint a picture of, you know, what a raid like this looks

like? Sure. There is video of both the raid at the newspaper newsroom, as well as at Eric and Joanne Meyer's home. The raid, my understanding, was a surprise to the reporters. They didn't know it was coming. One of the reporters actually said that the police statched her cell phone out of her hand, injuring her, exacerbating a previous injury that she had during the raid. And the video of the raid on the newsroom itself is interesting because it shows the police actually going through the newsroom, looking through documents, taking equipment, and making comments as they conduct the raid as well. And one of the comments that really stood out to us at Freedom of the Press Foundation was a police officer who is taking a computer and says something to the effect of, this is not encrypted, so we're good to go. That's not the exact quote, but something like that. This is not encrypted, so we're good to go. And the reason that stood out to us at Freedom of the Press Foundation is because we do a lot of work with journalists and newsrooms about the importance of encryption, both using encrypted messaging services to communicate with sources, but also making sure that their computers and other equipment are encrypted. So in the worst case scenario like this, if there is a police seizure of equipment, there is some level of protection for the information that is on that equipment. That's interesting. And has it been confirmed

yet whether or not the record's equipment was encrypted, in fact, or not? I don't believe

that's been confirmed. So the police have returned the equipment to the record. I should finish the story and say that five days after the raid, the police actually backed down and the Marion County attorney withdrew the search warrant and said that it never should have been issued in the first place. And the police returned the equipment to the record. The record's attorney has said that there's a forensic audit that's being conducted on the equipment right now to make sure that the police didn't actually copy it or look through it or otherwise tamper with it, because that's something that the paper absolutely wants to know before it starts using that equipment again.

So the warrant has now been reversed, but the police did initially obtain a warrant. Is it clear now or yet how law enforcement justified the raid, at least in the paperwork filing for the warrant. And is it clear yet how they were able to obtain the warrant? Why the judge signed it? Has anything come out since the raid itself? Yes. So the application that the

police filed with the warrant has been released to the public. It took a number of days for that to happen, but it was eventually released. And if you look at that application in the part where the police recite the facts that are supposed to give rise to probable cause, it's very illuminating because the facts that the police list, number one, don't give rise to probable cause, in my opinion, and also in the opinion of the Marion County attorney who withdrew the search warrant, and also do not acknowledge a federal law that protects newsrooms from these types of searches and seizures, which we can talk more about. But what the facts recount, basically, is the story that I told you at the beginning of this podcast, that the newspaper received this information, that it verified the information on a state website, that it contacted police, and that's how police knew about the case in the first instance. And just reciting those facts that then kind of conclusively states that the police believe they have evidence that the record has committed crimes like computer misuse and identity theft. So the probable cause affidavit with the application is, I would say, shockingly insufficient. And it's very concerning that any judge would sign this search warrant. It really raises the concern that the judge was basically just rubber stamping the search warrant. And in Kansas, search warrants can be signed by a magistrate judge. That's a a low-level judge. That's the level of judge who signed this search warrant. There's no requirement that those judges be attorneys in Kansas. In this instance, the judge was a former attorney before she was on the bench, so she did have legal training. But I think the case raises a broader concern in Kansas and other states. If you have judges who may have no legal training who can actually sign off on search warrants, things are going to be missed, especially important

protections for the press are going to be missed. Yeah. And speaking of the judge, I believe Eric Meyer recently gave an interview in Slate and the interviewer asked him why he thought the raid happened. And he said, quote, I think this is a confluence of personal animus from the mayor, a personal attempt to intimidate us from the police chief and basic incompetence from the judge and the county attorney. So I think, you know, there could have been an easy way to frame this as sort of a small town dust up, you know, just personal vendettas getting in the way. But I think the media has rightfully not framed it that way and framed it in wider, you know, First Amendment press freedom issues. I'm curious, you know, what's the immediate effect of a raid like this on a newsroom? You mentioned earlier that without the equipment and without their ad copy, they couldn't publish the next day's edition. But what are the short, medium, long-term effects of a raid like this on the newsroom, on a small town newsroom, and then also the media in general in the United States? Yeah. So one of the most immediate effects

for the journalists working in that newsroom is thinking about, are we going to be able to put out the next edition of the paper, as you said? And here with the record, incredibly, they were able to put out their next edition on time. They really had to scramble. They had to work hard. They were burning the midnight oil and working at all hours, but they did it. And that's amazing. And they deserve a lot of credit for continuing to publish in the face of a raid like this. But kind of longer term impacts, I think the raid sends a really chilling message to the reporters, not just at the record, but Kansas in general and really throughout the country. It sends a message that if you investigate a story that the police or the prosecutor or a powerful member of the community don't like, the authorities may target you. And that's very chilling for reporters who are called on every day to look into instances of misconduct or wrongdoing and to report on things that are probably going to make some people angry. And thankfully here, the reporters at the record haven't been chilled and have continued to do their great reporting even after the raid, as well as other reporters in Kansas. I have to say it was amazing to see the Kansas Press Association and other news outlets in Kansas step up their reporting about Marion and things happening in the community after the raid and show that they would not be silenced and intimidated by this. But journalists around the country will surely be looking at this and wondering, could my newsroom be raided if I report on something sensitive? Do I need to worry about this? And the other group that I think could be looking at this are the confidential sources that we rely on to talk to reporters, to tell them about important newsworthy matters that the public needs to know to blow the whistle when there is some sort of wrongdoing or criminal activity. Here, the record had a confidential source in the story that it was reporting about the business owner, but it also has confidential sources for other stories that it's reporting. And when the police go in and seize equipment like that and potentially rifle through all of the documents and notes and everything of a newspaper, that raises a real risk that authorities will be able to uncover the identities of confidential sources and learn about what they're telling reporters. And that makes sources much less likely to talk to the press. And when that happens, it's really the public that loses out on valuable information.

Yeah, it's certainly a chilling effect across a number of different constituencies. You mentioned earlier that this was a bit of a surprise to the reporters in the newsroom and the owner. And I think that's unsurprising that it was a surprise to them. They were probably thinking they were just doing the routine business of journalism and in verifying a news tip using public records, sort of the humdrum everyday work of a journalist. So I think that leads me to the question of what protections are afforded to journalists and who are considered journalists in the eyes of the law. I think this is a pretty almost stereotypical version of a newsroom to the public imagination. You have a small town newspaper, newsroom.

room. But, you know, under the law, who is a journalist and what protections are specifically

afforded to them? There is a federal law called the Privacy Protection Act of 1980 that was actually inspired by a newsroom raid. And that law prohibits newsroom raids in all but very limited circumstances that are set out in the statute. And so that's part of the reason that this raid is so concerning is because the Privacy Protection Act should have forbidden it. And it seems like it just wasn't even considered in this case. In the act itself, the way that it defines who it applies to is that it applies to any person who has the purpose of disseminating a newspaper or book or broadcast or something like that, something, some similar form of communication to the public. And so it's really a functional definition of journalism, which I think is very important. It doesn't require you to have the title of journalist. It doesn't require that you work for a newsroom with 50 other reporters or even 10 other reporters, it really applies to any person who is fulfilling that journalistic function, which is disseminating

information to the public. Have you ever thought to yourself, I really should be doing something to protect myself from all those stalkers, scammers, and hackers out there? You know, you know you're vulnerable, but you've done all the obvious things. You're not using short passwords. You're not repeating passwords, but you're not really sure what else to do. Maybe you've done all your two-step verification stuff. Let me tell you something simple you can do that'll make a big difference, go to www.joindeleteme.com slash lawfare20 and enter the promo code lawfare20. You'll get 20% off Delete Me. What is Delete Me, you ask? Well, Delete Me removes your personal information that's being sold online from the internet. Here's what you do. You first of all, you recognize the reality that in the age of AI, we are all especially vulnerable to scammers who use your personal data, which they can buy, and it's floating around on the internet and they use it against you. You get delete me and they get rid of that. You ever Googled yourself and found out that you can find your own home address, phone number, and the names of your family members? Well, if you can do it to yourself, other people can do it to you. And if you don't find that unsettling, well, you should. Here's the good news. Delete.me can help. It was named the top pick for data removal services by Wirecutter. You can get an individual plan for a little over $8 a month. I use Delete.me. I have used Delete.me since before it started advertising with Lawfare. I actually pay for my own Delete Me account myself. I know I could probably get a promo version because I read ad copy for them, but I don't. I actually use this product. I pay for this product, and I do it because I want to be able to tell you that completely honestly. Here you go. Take control of your data and keep your private life private by signing up for Delete Me now at a special discount for our listeners. Get 20% off your Delete Me plan when you go to www.joindeliteme.com slash lawfare20 and use the promo code LAWFARE20 at checkout. The only way to get 20% off is to go to www.joindeliteme.com slash LAWFARE20 and enter the code LAWFARE20 at checkout. That's www.joindeliteme.com slash lawfare20, code LAWFARE20. All right, I want to be straight with you.

I did not start Lawfare dreaming about payroll tax deadlines. I just didn't. I started it without thinking about running a business at all. I started it because I had things I wanted to say about law and national security. and my friends did too. And I thought, wouldn't it be fun to have, we called it a blog back then, wouldn't it be fun to have a blog where we could talk about national security and law? And not once in that process did I say, I want to file payroll tax stuff on time. And yet every quarter, there they are sitting on our desk. And if only Gusto had been there back then to handle that Park quietly in.

the background so that I could stop dreading the calendar, that would have been awesome. Gusto is online payroll and benefits software built for small businesses. It's all-in-one, remote-friendly, and incredibly easy to use, so you can pay, hire, onboard, and support your team from anywhere. Now, I was just in Kenya. Would have been great to be able to do that stuff from there back in the day when I was still doing the payroll myself, which I'm not. You can save time with built-in automated tools, offer letters, onboarding documents, direct deposit, and more. I'm talking about automatic payroll tax filing, simple direct deposits, health benefits, commuter benefits, workers' comp, 401k, you name it. Gusto makes it simple and it has options for nearly every budget, which is why it is ranked number one in G2's highest satisfaction products list for 2026 and trusted by more than half a million small businesses. So, try Gusto today at gusto.com slash lawfare and get three months free when you run your first payroll. That's three months of free payroll at gusto.com slash lawfare. One more time, gusto.com slash lawfare.

You update anything and everything from wherever you are. Transform the everyday with Siemens.

Hey, it's Adam Grant from Ted's podcast, Rethinking with Adam Grant. This episode is sponsored by Ambetter Health. If you run a business or work with employers on benefits, you know the story. Group health insurance costs keep climbing, and the plans rarely fit everyone's needs. There's a newer model worth knowing about called an ICRA, which lets employers set a contribution and employees choose their own health plan based on their doctors, budget, and what actually works for them. Healthcare isn't a group decision, so why should coverage be? Get coverage you control. Find out if an ICRA is right for you at ambetterhealth.com.

You're a pro at running your life, at committing to your workout, at showing up every day. At Bombas, we're pros too. Pros at making socks. Our sport assortment has specialized socks for whatever sport you're committed to. Running, hiking, golf, Pilates, and so much more. Made with sweat-wicking yarns, blister-fighting details, and targeted arch support. Bombas Sport is pro-level socks from the pros of socks. For another pro, you. Go to bombas.com slash audio and use code audio for 20% off your first purchase. That's bombas.com and use code audio.

And how should this have worked? If the police or law enforcement have a quote-unquote credible legal concern, that a newsroom is committing wrongdoing. Short of a raid, how should this have worked?

The way it should have worked under the Privacy Protection Act is that police should have gotten a subpoena, which is a legal order that they would have served on the newspaper, ordering it to supply certain documents or equipment or whatever it is the police were seeking. So that's the kind of essential protection of the Privacy Protection Act of 1980. It doesn't say that police can't have access to materials, but it imposes this subpoena-first requirement rather than a search warrant and a search. And the reason that that is important is because a subpoena gives a newsroom the opportunity to object in advance before police can get their hands on documents or equipment. So in the case of the record, when police turned up with the search warrant, the record really didn't have any choice but to comply with the search warrant. The police had a facially valid search warrant, and so they had to comply. If the police had done the right thing and gotten a subpoena, the record could have gone into court in advance and said, we have the following legal bases not to turn over this information the police is seeking. Importantly, one of them would have been the Kansas Shield law, the reporter's privilege law in Kansas, which actually provides protections for journalists, journalistic materials there. And so giving that protection, that ability to go into a court in advance and object, I just can't emphasize enough how important that is for a newsroom. And that's what the police absolutely should have done here if they were even going to pursue this investigation. I mean, it's outrageous that they were investigating the newspaper in the first instance for doing nothing more than verifying a tip. But if they were going to pursue the investigation, they really needed to use the subpoena process, not a search warrant.

And of course, as you so well laid out, they did not.

do that. And they went ahead with the raid. I'm curious what has happened now since then and what sort of recourse is available to the record and its owner. You mentioned that the search warrant has been reversed and the seized equipment is now making its way back to the newspaper. What's next for the record? What do you think their options are now?

The record has hired an attorney and they have said that they are investigating all legal options to try to vindicate their rights, even after the search warrant has been withdrawn and the equipment has been returned. The Privacy Protection Act does provide for a civil remedy. It lets journalists or newsrooms whose rights have been violated under the act file a civil lawsuit against the officials who have violated the act, and it provides for damages in that instance. So that's one option that the record has. The record also could potentially consider a lawsuit under Section 1983, a federal statute that allows people to sue officials for violations of their constitutional rights. And I think, frankly, the record could also consider a wrongful death lawsuit, given the fact that Joanne Meyer died as a result of the raid. And of course, that will be cold comfort to her family and the community and Marion who lost this person who can never be brought back. But I think that it's a very serious possibility and something

that the record could be considering. I'd love to broaden the lens here beyond Kansas to place this particular raid, maybe in the broader context of newspaper raids in the country, or just in the broader context of violations of press freedom in general in the country. There's a lot of attention, I think, again, rightfully so on Marion right now. But where else has this sort of thing been happening in the country? And, you know, what are other areas of concern for you at the

foundation? Well, newsroom raids themselves are extremely rare, likely because of the Privacy Protection Act and the fact that they are illegal. Before the raid on the record, the last newsroom search that I'm aware of was in 2010, when police raided the offices of the student newspaper at James Madison University, The Breeze. They were looking for photographs that they thought the student newspaper may have from a street party that had gotten out of control and turned into kind of a brawl or a riot. And they got a search warrant for the student newspaper's offices. They seized a CD that they believed contained photographs on it. The newspaper did hire a lawyer. And after days of negotiation, the Commonwealth's attorney withdrew that search warrant and returned the CD to the newspaper. So kind of a similar scenario to this one. But that was more than a decade ago. And so these types of searches on an actual newsroom are very rare. That's not to say that other types of similar searches haven't happened more recently in the past. So in recent years in San Francisco, there was a search of the home of a freelance journalist, Brian Carmody, who had reported on the death of a public defender in San Francisco. And he had received a confidential police report from a source and police were trying to investigate the source of the leak of the report. And they searched Carmody's home. And again, this was an outrageous violation of press freedom. It was really shocking, but it was a freelancer, and so it didn't have the same resonance maybe as it does when police raid a newsroom. Still, Carmody objected, and eventually the search warrants were quashed, and he actually filed a civil suit like we were talking about, and the police ended up settling with him for more than $300,000. Even more recently, at almost the same time that the raid on the Marion County record was happening, there had been an FBI raid of a freelance journalist in Florida, Tim Burke, and his home office was raided and police seized materials from that. They have accused Burke of violating certain federal computer crime statutes. And it's based on reporting that Burke has done about outtakes from the former Fox News host Tucker Carlson's show. And what Burke is well known for is accessing video and audio on publicly accessible websites, but that are kind of hidden or not well known to the general public, and then packaging them and selling them to other news outlets to produce a story. And that's what he says that he did here. But federal authorities say that he's broken computer crime laws by doing that. And they've raided his house. And very troublingly in that case, documents that the prosecutors have filed have questioned whether Burke is a journalist because he calls himself, I think, a media consultant on his website.

And that goes back to the question you asked about, you know, who is a journalist? And it really shouldn't come down to the title. He may have used the title media consultant because he's freelancing now. But what he's doing is collecting newsworthy information and disseminating it to the public. public. And that journalistic function is what really should matter. So the raid on Marion was rare, but it is not the only type of violation of press freedom that's in a similar vein that we're concerned about at Freedom of the Press Foundation. And that doesn't even get into the many other cases of journalists who may be covering a protest and have their cell phone seized by police or their recording equipment or their camera. So we have to stay vigilant about press freedom in the US, we can't be complacent and think, oh, we have the First Amendment and

everything is fine. Yeah, it's a great point. And a shameless plug for the Knight First Amendment Institute this summer published a report on violations of press freedom of journalists covering protests specifically during 2020. And the authors came on the Lawfare podcast a few weeks ago. So if you're listening to this and you're interested in that, definitely check it out. It's very relevant to this discussion as well, unfortunately. You mentioned earlier in the in the discussion about encryption. What are some other ways that journalists of all stripes from freelancers slash media consultants working alone to newsrooms can protect themselves or, you know, reinforce their own rights or protect themselves against violations of their own rights and feel free to elaborate a little more on encryption. But I'm curious, you know, any other ways that newsrooms can do this? Sure. So I hope that any journalists listening

now know about the Privacy Protection Act of 1980 and how important it is. And what we recommend is that you actually keep a copy of that law in your newsroom. Or if you're a journalist working from home, keep a copy of it at home. And if police show up at your premises with a search warrant, first of all, stay calm, be polite, but ask to see a copy of the search warrant. Ask them if you can call your editor or your newsroom lawyer if you have one. If you don't have a newsroom lawyer, The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press offers a legal hotline that reporters can call to try to connect with an attorney. So that's another good resource. But also give them a copy of that Privacy Protection Act that you have stashed away at home and point out to them the protections in the law and the fact that officers can be held personally liable if they violate the law and really do everything you can to try, I guess, to delay the search before you can get your lawyer or your editor there to try to object. You obviously have to stay polite and professional. You can't obstruct officers. But I think just knowing what your rights are as a journalist and making sure that you are politely but confidently asserting them may be helpful in situations like this with the police. Encryption, like you mentioned, Tyler, is important. And keeping the backup copies of your records is also important. That's something that the newspaper in Marion County learned when its equipment was seized. One of the problems was it didn't have any backups. And so it was missing a lot of stuff that it needed for the next edition of the paper. And so keeping those backups are important. If you're looking for really, you know, practical advice about encryption and what to do, I'll point listeners to guides that the Freedom of the Press Foundation has on its website about how to use encryption and how to keep your material safe and backed up.

Yeah, thank you. That's a really helpful and actionable list. And speaking of helpful and actionable lists, you recently, Caitlin, published a piece on the Freedom of the Press Foundation's website called Now is the Time to Stand with the Marion County Record, Here's How. So I'd love if you could walk through some of those ways that you mentioned in your piece for any listeners who may be alarmed by the recent raid and moved to do something.

Yeah, absolutely. So the equipment has been returned and the search warrant has been withdrawn, but the fight is not over for the record. As we've talked about, they've hired an attorney and they are pursuing potential legal claims against the police and the authorities. And that's really important, not just for the record, but also for press freedom as a whole to vindicate those rights and to send a message that when authorities violate press freedom rights, there are consequences. So one thing that people can do is support that legal fight that the record is taking up. And the Society for Professional Journalists has pledged to cover up to $20,000 in legal fees for the record. And they also have said that if you donate to the SPJ Legal Defense Fund, you can actually earmark your pledge for the record by using the dedication box when you donate. So that's one way listeners can help support the record. They can also just subscribe to the record. You can get an online subscription. Some people have gotten creative and actually bought classified ads in the record to like publish the text of the First Amendment, which is another way to support the record financially and is important. And then Joanne Meyer's family has asked for donations to be made to the Kansas Newspaper Foundation in her memory. So those are other another avenue of financial support. Other than financial support, I think just adding your voice to the chorus of people.

that have condemned the raid and are supporting press freedom is incredibly important. The reason that the police reversed their decision here and the reason that the search warrant was withdrawn was because there was a public outcry and because the story garnered national media attention. And unfortunately, that doesn't always happen with every press freedom violation and it needs to happen more. So adding your voice and condemning not just this raid, but anytime you see a press freedom violation, write a letter to the editor, or you could even write an op-ed for your local news outlet, or talk to your neighbors, or put it out on local listservs or social media and condemn what's happening and speak up on behalf of journalists and the free press. That goes a long way, and regular people can really contribute to the fight for press freedom by

doing that. Thank you so much for that. Again, very helpful and actionable list. Caitlin Vogus is the Deputy Director of Advocacy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation. Thank you so much for taking the time.

Thank you for having me and for covering this really important story for Press Freedom.

The Lawfare Podcast is produced in cooperation with the Brookings Institution. You can get ad-free versions of this and other Lawfare Podcasts by becoming a Lawfare material supporter through our website, lawfaremedia.org support. You'll also get access to special events and other content available only to our supporters. Please rate and review us wherever you get your podcasts. Look out for other shows, including Rational Security, Chatter, Allies, and The Aftermath, our latest Lawfare Presents podcast series on the government's response to January 6th. Check out our written work at lawfaremedia.org. The podcast is edited by Jen Patia Howell, and your audio engineer this episode was Noama's Band of Goat Rodeo. Our music is performed by Sophia Yan. As always, thanks for listening.

This is going to be an extremely busy month. I have to watch 104 soccer games, follow the pregame, the postgame, yell useless opinions at the TV. It's a lot. So I knew that when it comes to screening for colon cancer, the choice was clear. The Cologuard Plus Test. It can be used at home and can only take 15 minutes. So I can do it during halftime and not miss any action. If you are 45 or older and at average risk, ask your health care provider about screening for colon cancer with the Cologuard Test. You can also request a prescription at Cologuard.com.

You