I believe that the ramifications of this case come down to which way the case is decided. As a lawyer representing the United States, I stand by the Constitution of the United States. The decision of this case will alter and shape our First Amendment for years to come.

If I were to win this suit, I would press the issue of national security. This appeal came from the debate of where we draw the line between national security and freedom of the press. Representing the United States it’s my duty to represent citizens’ rights and protections granted by the Constitution.  The last time that the Supreme Court weighed in on reporters and the issue of protecting confidential sources was in 1972 with the Branzburg .v Hayes case. At this point, no federal law exists to protect journalists from revealing their confidential sources. Issuing a federal shield law brings many questions and concerns to the table and could ultimately change journalism forever. Many will argue why journalists should get special treatment. Already, a fine line exists between reporting and ethics. Issuing a federal shield law will allow journalists to behave irresponsibly knowing that they will be protected.