The CJR review of Congressman Pence included an interesting detail that adds an element of hope to the otherwise pessimistic future of the relationship between the public, the press and government.

When Nordenson said Pence began his initiative for a federal shield law after reflecting on the actions taken by New York Time reporter Judith Miller, I was immediately reaffirmed of the often neglected significance of those unfortunate series of events that scarred society’s perception of journalists in 2003.

Perhaps a federal shield law, along with Rep. Pence’s efforts as he works to pass legislation of Capitol Hill, will serve as the long overdue recognition of the heroism displayed by Miller.  She fought to defend the media’s role as the primary arbiter of information to society and simultaneously upheld the constitutional principle of a free press.  Her bold actions and highly criticized resistance to editors and pundits, as they urged her to reveal her sources, are unquestionably significant for the future of journalism.  Their value can only magnify through federal legislation.

The relationship between a reporter and his or her source is a pillar, often the most critical and highly challenged, of the news gathering process.  A journalist’s primary obligation is relaying the truth to society and its members, especially those who find interest in matters of legitimate public concern.  A federal shield law would rekindle the necessary fire of protecting confidential sources that has upheld a democratic and uniquely American form of free debate for over 200 years.

Without confidentiality and anonymity, the public would be left in the dark on an even greater number of issues than they are under the current precedent established by Branzburg v. Hayes.  As situations similar to Miller’s—where a reporter is jailed and stripped of their rights in the name of national security or government interests—become more commonplace in the marketplace of ideas, the more the risk of reducing the independence of a free press is amplified.

If the common citizen is unable to engage in a knowledgeable forum to develop solutions to societal problems because the press is restricted from executing its core mission, America will have to reassess whether the foundational democratic principles that have built such a sturdy and steadfast nation still apply.  Making sure that sources are protected and reducing their vulnerability is one way to avoid such painful consideration.