Two Small Pieces of News from the Sunday Shows on Leaks

Former Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair ABC, speaking about how leaks from the top of the Obama administration set the tone for leaks further down that are subject of DOJ investigations:

Martha Raddatz: "You've heard the press's side there.  Admiral Blair, you were in the White House. The leak investigations have been quite intense in the Obama White House. Dennis Blair: Right.  And they have been directed, the ones that I knew about, mostly against the U.S. government employees who were talking with reporters which is where I think they should be directed.  I know of no institution in America better able to defend itself than the press.  So I think that will work out okay.  But what I think is that the leaking at the top of this administration ... is what sets the tone for those below.  And I think that most of the -- most of what administration spokesmen should talk about with reporters should be talked about on the record, with their names attached to it.  To set an example so that those further down the line don't think that leaking is the way it's done, the way it should be done. (emphasis added)

And Senator Schumer on CBS, proposing that a court decide when journalists must divulge sources:

I proposed along with [Sen.] Lindsey Graham [R-S.C.], we’ll be announcing that we have four Democrats, four Republicans, another Gang of Eight . . . [that will introduce] legislation that sets up rules where . . . if the government wants to go to a member of the press and say you have to divulge your sources and certain information, they first have to go to a judge, and that judge will impose a balancing test [and say] ‘which is more important? The government desire to… find out who leaked the information or the robust freedom of the press?’”

Senator Schumer did not explain how judges would balance these aims, or why the proposal would be constitutional.