DOJ Attorneys Push Back On Restraining Order Supporting Journalists In Portland

PORTLAND, OR - JULY 30: A journalist runs past federal officers after he was caught behind a police line during a protest against racial injustice and police brutality in front of the Mark O. Hatfield U.S. Courthouse... PORTLAND, OR - JULY 30: A journalist runs past federal officers after he was caught behind a police line during a protest against racial injustice and police brutality in front of the Mark O. Hatfield U.S. Courthouse in the early hours of July 30, 2020 in Portland, Oregon. Protests against the federal presence in Portland continued Wednesday following an announcement by Governor Kate Brown that federal officers would begin a phased withdrawal from the city. (Photo by Nathan Howard/Getty Images) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

The Department of Justice is pushing for a court order protecting journalists from arrest during the months-long Portland protests to be lifted, claiming that some of those engaged in violence have used the order to “masquerade” as members of the press.

U.S. Attorney for Oregon Billy Williams, with a group of DOJ attorneys, submitted a filing Thursday contesting the temporary restraining order issued last week by U.S. District Court Judge Michael Simon that blocks federal authorities from targeting the press, suggesting that it should be discarded or, alternatively, converted to a “preliminary injunction.”

Simon’s order also requires law enforcement to allow individuals claiming to be journalists to remain in place even when crowds are ordered to disperse. 

Justice Department attorneys argued that “savvy protesters” were abusing the restraining order to “evade lawful orders, impede law enforcement, and perpetrate crimes.” The attorneys said that the restraining order had become “unworkable” and “must be dissolved.”

The original lawsuit filed by the ACLU of Oregon cited several instances in which journalists and legal observers had been targeted by federal agents. Mathieu Lewis-Rolland, a freelance photographer, claimed he was shot 10 times in the back with impact munitions by federal agents and Justin Yau, a freelance journalist, was attacked with tear gas.

The Justice Department cited reports from federal agents about protesters allegedly  wearing “press” patches or badges and assaulting or interfering with officers or attempting to damage or scale the perimeter fence.

The filing argues that the restraining order further endangers law enforcement since “under the chaotic circumstances of the protests, it is difficult for officers, who are often wearing gas masks and laser protective goggles, to verify small indicia of press membership.”

In an interview with NBC-affiliate KGW8 lat week, Williams said the media have “failed” in their unwillingness to call out “people engaged in criminal conduct, as criminals, as opposed to lawful protesting.”

Pushback on the restraining order comes amid a Washington Post report Thursday that found the DHS’ intelligence office had been compiling reports on the work of journalists covering the Portland protests. 

Acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf ordered the office to stop collecting information about reporters and called for an internal investigation into the matter.

The challenge to the restraining order also follows a tenuous agreement with conditions established by Oregon Gov. Kate Brown (D) with the Trump administration to ensure that federal agents retreat from the city. The agreement for the phased withdrawal of federal law enforcement, announced Wednesday, involves Oregon State Police reinforcing a security perimeter around a federal courthouse which has been a gathering point for many of the city’s nightly demonstrations.

The call to rescind the restraining order even amid a coordinated effort with state police seems to indicate an attempt by the federal government to continue its widely criticized strategy to quell unrest unquestioned and without restriction. The DOJ filing claims as much, saying that the restraining order imposes “unworkable restrictions on officers’ professional judgment.” 

Matthew Borden, an attorney handling the case for the American Civil Liberties Union’s Oregon chapter, said protesters “masquerading as press” is both “ill-advised and rare.” But such behavior, he argued, “is not probable cause for arrest or dispersal, or justification for brutally and deliberately attacking reporters.”

“The restraining order simply orders federal agents to abide by the law, which is to not arrest, threaten to arrest, or use physical force against journalist unless the government has probable cause to believe that such individual has committed a crime,” Borden said in a statement obtained by Politico. “If the government objects to the order, they’re making clear what is already known: the government has no intention of following the law.”

Read the full filing below:

Latest News

Notable Replies

  1. “An adversary — a common generic term for a person or group that opposes ones tactical goals — is acting counter to our information security objectives and therefore personnel must understand that threat,” Orland said in a statement. “Attempting to read more into the use of the term obfuscates the clear purpose of the training: to prevent information from falling into unauthorized hands regardless of its potential use.”

    So being able to freely report what is going on is now against the military’s tactical goals in the homeland?

  2. Journalists everywhere should be taught that the US government considers them, not just adversaries, enemies.
    Stay safe.

  3. WTF is WRONG with ‘our’ DOJ??? They swore to uphold the Constitution but they pick and choose WHAT to protect?

  4. If a member of the press (or someone pretending to be one) actually attacked an officer, of course they would be arrested, that’s simple logic and the court order doesn’t change that. This is just another attempt by DHS to abrogate Constitutional protections for the press to report on their activity. The leaders of the DHS would probably welcome the limits on our freedoms that China is imposing in Hong Kong, they are right in line with dictators sending thugs to beat protestors and control the news reports afterwards.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

23 more replies

Participants

Avatar for discobot Avatar for littlegirlblue Avatar for sysprog Avatar for trnc Avatar for drriddle Avatar for hagarwood Avatar for pshah Avatar for edgarant Avatar for caltg Avatar for brian512 Avatar for spin Avatar for the_loan_arranger Avatar for skeptical Avatar for timorwig Avatar for bcgister Avatar for heartflow Avatar for garrybee Avatar for kovie Avatar for Mingus Avatar for DanielDiRito Avatar for Citizen1 Avatar for Clint_M Avatar for Caepan Avatar for Somellish

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: