The state shield law was adopted in 1937 and is one of the strongest in the country. The law provides an "absolute protection" of a source's identity, even if the information involves a grand-jury proceeding.
The same protection doesn't exist at the federal level, despite recent efforts in Washington. The House overwhelmingly approved a bill last year that would protect journalists from revealing their sources in most cases, but the Senate failed to act.
The ultimate beneficiary of a shield law is a better-informed public. The ability to protect sources often enables reporters to gain access to information the government or others may seek to suppress.
The Supreme Court decision, dated Sept. 24, stems from a case in which two Lackawanna County commissioners sued the Scranton Times-Tribune after a 2004 story reported that they weren't cooperative during grand-jury proceedings involving alleged brutality at the county prison.
Representing the commissioners was Philadelphia attorney Richard A. Sprague. He argued unsuccessfully that an exception to the shield law should apply because the information obtained violated the state Grand Jury Act, and thus constituted a crime. The court correctly rejected that theory.
Castille wrote that the grand-jury secrecy rules apply only to members of the court who are sworn to secrecy. Or as the court said: "It is the speaker" and "not the listener" who "has the capacity to commit a crime." Reporting on what takes place at a grand jury is perfectly legal.
The state shield law is clear: No reporter "shall be required to disclose the source of any information procured or obtained by such person, in any legal proceeding, trial or investigation before any government unit."
Justice Seamus P. McCaffery disagreed with the majority. He said the commissioners have a right to determine whether the source exists. Castille said that legal argument was off base and "not the focus of the case."
One red flag: Castille did leave the door ajar for a future challenge to the shield law's protection surrounding the grand-jury secrecy provisions. He hinted that the shield law may not apply if the state were seeking to learn the identity of a grand-jury leak in a criminal case.
But that question wasn't before the court. "We save its consideration for another day," Castille wrote.
For now, the shield law is secure.
