A major press freedom group is taking the Department of Justice to court. The lawsuit seeks records on whether federal law protecting journalists was hidden from judges. The outcome could impact how leak investigations target reporters.
Media professionals tracking government transparency and press protections are watching a new legal battle unfold between Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF) and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). FPF has filed a federal lawsuit demanding records that could reveal whether the DOJ is systematically withholding statutory press protections from federal judges to obtain search warrants against journalists.
The lawsuit, filed with support from Free Information Group, follows the DOJ’s refusal to release documents related to the FBI’s January 14 raid on Washington Post reporter Hannah Natanson’s home. Central to the case is whether the DOJ has an internal practice of not disclosing the Privacy Protection Act of 1980—a law that prohibits raids on journalists’ homes and newsrooms—when seeking warrants in leak investigations.
According to court filings, Assistant U.S. Attorney Gordon D. Kromberg acknowledged knowing about the Privacy Protection Act but said he omitted it from the Natanson warrant process due to “department policy.” This omission led FPF to file a formal bar complaint against Kromberg. In February, a federal judge halted the government’s search of Natanson’s devices, stating that the DOJ’s failure to inform the court about the Privacy Protection Act “seriously undermined the Court’s confidence in the government’s disclosures.” Magistrate Judge William Porter also suggested the search fit a broader pattern of retaliation against the press and efforts to remove employees seen as disloyal within the DOJ and other federal agencies.
FPF’s chief of advocacy, Seth Stern, said the DOJ’s actions threaten investigative journalism by bypassing explicit legal safeguards meant to protect reporters and their sources. Lauren Harper, FPF’s Daniel Ellsberg chair on government secrecy, added that the DOJ’s lack of transparency and failure to comply with Freedom of Information Act requests forced the organization to take legal action. Ginger Quintero-McCall, a partner at Free Information Group, argued that the DOJ’s conduct during the Natanson search sets a dangerous precedent and that the public deserves to know if this is an isolated incident or official policy.
This legal fight comes as publishers and media organizations are increasingly scrutinizing government actions that could undermine press freedom. Recent industry debates, such as those highlighted in coverage of publisher concerns over trust and legal risks in AI partnerships, show how transparency and legal safeguards remain central to the future of journalism.
