In the wake of recent court decisions, more reporters are going to jail to protect their confidential sources, putting a robust press at risk unless Congress approves national legislation to shield journalists and their sources, according a top First Amendment litigator for ABC News.

“It’s very scary,” said Indira Satyendra, an attorney and an expert in reporter’s privilege and libel law. “The reporter is at risk for doing his job.”

Satyendra, speaking at a conference for student journalists on October 12 at the City University of New York Graduate Center, cited cases in Rhode Island and California as well as New York Times reporter Judith Miller’s 86-day jail stay for refusing to disclose her source to federal prosecutors investigating the leaking of classified information.

Forty-nine states have laws that offer partial or full protection for reporters and their sources, either by state statute or judicial interpretation of state or federal law. New York State Law is very protective of its reporters, yet according to Satyendra, her department is constantly battling subpoenas from litigants who want ABC News to disclose their reporters notes and sources.

She explained that recent court decisions are slowly and effectively chipping away at reporters’ protections. In a 1972 split decision, Branzburg vs. Hayes, the Supreme Court left the protection of sources to be determined on a state-by-state basis.

More recently, with the case of Miller, a federal appeals court unanimously agreed with a lower court that held journalists cannot take refuge under the First Amendment when refusing to disclose their confidential sources, according to a report issued Media Law Resource Center Institute. In June 2005, the Supreme Court refuse to consider the Miller case, letting the appeals court decision stand. The next month, several representatives lead by Rep. Michael Pence (R-IND.) proposed legislation for a national shield law for reporters and their sources unless “imminent and actual harm to national security” can be demonstrated, according to the bill.

Supporters are hopeful that the measure will become law, but similar efforts in the past have failed

“Reporter’s can’t live without sources,” Ms. Satyendra said. She cited several recent investigative stories that relied on confidential sources, including the examination into unsafe conditions at the famed Walter Reed Army Medical Center. A series of stories by the Washington Post detailed how soldiers returning from combat zones were subjected poor treatment in unsafe conditions. Another instance where unnamed sources provided tips and images was the abuse by U.S. military of prisoners held at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

As a First Amendment lawyer for ABC News, Satyendra said she reviews material that a reporter wishes to put on air, so that if a reporter is ever subpoenaed for charges of false information, she can confidently step in and tell the court that the reporter has thoroughly checked their sources; this is essential to ensuring a strong defense should reporter eventually be forced to respond to a court order demanding private notes, phone records, source identification or other investigative materials essential to the reporter’s craft.

She cited Rhode Island investigative reporter Jim Taricani who had been given an FBI tape of the mayor’s assistant accepting brides. A court ordered him to reveal his source and after refusing, he was sentenced to six months of house arrest.

Closes to home, Satyendra spoke of a situation where in 2003, a young Hunter college student Ramona Moore was brutally tortured, raped and murdered in downtown Brooklyn by two assailants. ABC News was filming the detectives who were working on the investigation, as well as when they interrogated the witness to the case. The defense of the assailants went to court requesting the tape stating that it would help the case, but the judge refused, citing a New York law which protects sources.

In this uncertain environment, how can a reporter protect themselves and their sources. Some reporters are resorting to untraceable cell phones. She also stated that companies advise their reporters to keep their notes separate from their work computer. But the number one rule, she said, is always be honest with your sources.

Because reporters use confidential sources to cover sensitive news and news stories about powerful institutions

‘ “Without the assurance of confidentiality, many whistle-blowers will simply refuse to come forward, and reporters will be unable to provide the American public with information they need to make decisions as an informed electorate,” he said.

Reporters have been coming under attack to reveal the sources of their story. In the past reporters were rarely, if ever asked for their sources but recent events have many asking, how safe are sources from being discovered?

Indirya Satyendra, an attorney for ABC spoke at Cuny’s annual media conference in a panelt titled “Ho to Protect Your Sources.”