Journalists have long faced obstacles in their pursuit of truth, but in recent years, a troubling trend has emerged: government-imposed gag rules that restrict public employees from speaking freely with the press. These restrictions, often enforced through public information offices or direct bans on communication, limit transparency and public accountability. In a recent episode of E&P Reports, Mike Blinder sat down with veteran Journalist Kathryn Foxhall and First Amendment Attorney Frank LoMonte to discuss the issue, its legal implications, and what journalists can do to push back.
The chilling effect of gag rules on press freedom
Foxhall, who has covered health and government issues for decades, has been tracking the rise of these restrictions. “This trend started over 40 years ago,” she explained. “It began in the Reagan administration and got progressively worse because there was no pushback. Journalists didn’t fight it.”
According to Foxhall, these rules have become so deeply entrenched that many journalists accept them as standard practice. “We think we’re getting the full story, but often, we’re only hearing what’s been approved for public release,” she said. She emphasized that reporters may never uncover deeper issues affecting public health, safety, and governance without confidential access to sources.
LoMonte, who has extensively researched and litigated First Amendment cases, reinforced the dangers of these policies. “You don’t surrender all your First Amendment rights when you take a government paycheck,” he said. “A rich body of case law, including from the U.S. Supreme Court, says these blanket restrictions are unconstitutional.”
A legal battle with precedent
A recent legal victory has given hope to those fighting against gag rules. Investigative Journalist Brittany Hailer took action against the Allegheny County Jail in Pittsburgh, which had policies barring employees from speaking to the press. With legal assistance from the Yale Law School Media Freedom and Information Access Clinic, Hailer challenged the restrictions and won a settlement that acknowledged the rights of public employees to communicate with journalists.
“Hailer’s case set an important precedent,” LoMonte said. “The county didn’t even attempt to defend the policy. They came to the table and asked, ‘What do you want to make this go away?’ That tells you how weak their position was legally.”
While the case didn’t go to trial, it demonstrated that journalists can take legal action and win. “It’s not as influential as a Supreme Court ruling, but it’s a major step in the right direction,” LoMonte added.
Foxhall stressed that this victory should encourage other journalists and news organizations to challenge similar restrictions. “We’ve had attorneys looking for more cases,” she said. “If we don’t keep up the pressure, these policies will only get worse.”
The importance of newsroom leadership in pushing back
For many journalists, the biggest obstacle isn't just the existence of gag rules; it’s the lack of institutional support to fight them. Blinder asked Foxhall what news executives should do when their reporters encounter these roadblocks.
“I would highly encourage, almost plead with them, to support their journalists,” Foxhall said. “Too often, the reaction is, ‘Just get the quote and move on.’ But this isn’t just about one story; it’s about the long-term ability of the press to hold government accountable.”
She emphasized that news leaders need to recognize gag rules as an ethical issue. “If you have these restrictions in your community — whether at a school district, a government office, or even a nonprofit — you have a problem endangering the people and programs in your area,” she said. “You don’t wait until disaster strikes to start asking questions. That’s not just bad journalism; it’s unethical journalism.”
LoMonte added that newsroom leaders should educate their teams about their legal rights. “When you hear that public employees aren’t allowed to talk to the press, go into reporting mode,” he advised. “Ask to see the policy. Sometimes, it doesn’t actually exist. It’s just water cooler talk. And when there is a written policy, it’s often much weaker than people assume.”
Where do we go from here?
As the conversation wrapped up, Blinder gave Foxhall the floor to make her final appeal.
“I would plead with people to consider this a very serious ethical problem,” she said. “As a public health reporter, I fully believe that we could have stopped or at least alleviated the pandemic if reporters had been inside the CDC in the years prior. But we weren’t. We were given hell just for trying to talk to someone.”
She warned that the consequences of these restrictions extend beyond journalism. “People could die. Programs could collapse. Governments could fail their citizens because we’re not seeing the full picture,” she said.
LoMonte and Foxhall urged journalists to report instances of gag rules to organizations like the Society of Professional Journalists and to consider legal action when appropriate.
Blinder closed by reaffirming Editor & Publisher’s commitment to amplifying the issue. “This is one of the top threats to journalism today,” he said. “And we will continue to cover it, to support those fighting it, and to hold those responsible accountable.”
 |
 |
Please contact Kathryn Foxhall, SPJ's point person on the topic, at 
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here