- A full description of this background can be found in the Sidle Report. See Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Media Military Relations Panel, Final Report (August 23, 1984). See also Department of Defense Review of Panama Pool Deployment (March, 1990) (“Hoffman Report”).
- The first set of press regulations was issued on January 7, 1991 (see infra Appendix A). Revised versions were issued on January 10, 1991 and January 14, 1991 (see infra Appendix C). The latest version was issued on January 30, 1991 (see infra Appendix D). The “ground rules,” which were a separate portion of the DOD regulations, are not included in the definition of “press regulations” and are not challenged in this action. See transcript, March 7, 1991, at p. 18. In fact, it is a version of the ground rules as presently written that were utilized during the Vietnam conflict, which the plaintiffs suggest should be the only restriction on the press in war time. See id. at p. 18.
- The regulations by their terms relate only to the “initial stages” of a military operation. DOD used the term “initial” numerous times in its brief and alluded to the fact that a basis for surviving a First Amendment challenge is the limited amount of time for which the restrictions would apply. See Defendant's Memorandum of Law at p. 7. Yet, the record discloses the difficulty in defining this term, causing this Court to inquire of the defendants when, after the ground war was well under way, such initial stage would be deemed to be over. In fact, the regulations were not lifted until March 4, 1991. See transcript, March 7, 1991, at pp. 8–10.
- Appendix D, infra.
- “Unilateral coverage” is the term utilized as an antonym to “pool coverage.” Under unilateral coverage there are few if any restrictions on “access” to the battle arena.
- See infra note 32.
- On January 10, 1991, Mr. Williams, speaking at a DOD press briefing, stated that an order had been issued to detain reporters who appeared unescorted on the battlefield with one of the forward units, remove them to the rear, and send them to Dhahran as soon as possible. See infra DOD News Briefing Transcript, January 10, 1991, by Mr. Pete Williams, at p. 2.
- Appendix D, infra.
- Appendix C, infra.
- See amicus brief of Washington Legal Foundation [Washington, D.C.], pp. 15–21.
- See Defendant's Reply Memorandum, p. 7.
- Only the portion of these claims constituting “facial challenges” are eligible for declaratory relief. Any claims regarding the “as applied” aspects of these issues are moot.
- The United States Senate responded to the blackout and use of pools in Grenada by passing a resolution which stated, in part, that “since a free press is an essential feature of our democratic system of government and since currently in Lebanon, and traditionally in the past, the United States has allowed the press to cover conflicts involving United States armed forces, restrictions imposed upon the press in Grenada shall cease.” 129 Cong. Ree. S14957 (daily ed. Oct. 29, 1983).
- See infra First Amended Verified Complaint, # 54, and Memorandum in Support of Cross-Motion for a Preliminary Injunction and in Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (“Memorandum”).
- Plaintiffs suggest that the criteria for exclusion in the pools, including particularly the requirement that the press organization “have had a long-term presence covering Department of Defense military operations,” is an unconstitutional condition.
- When the NATION plaintiffs argued that “pooling which restricts the access of press members who want access to an open event is a prior restraint,” the Court inquired whether that statement was “subject to reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions?” In response, plaintiffs' counsel correctly responded “Yes, that is the law.” See transcript, March 7, 1991, at 15.
- Plaintiffs contend that the Court should recognize the right of the press to unrestricted access, and hold, as a matter of constitutional law, that DOD follow only those guidelines used during the Vietnam War. If there is a certain lesson that Desert Storm has taught us, it is that the nature of warfare has changed radically as a result of new technology. There is little similarity between the Vietnam War and Desert Storm. The traditional battlefield of the two World Wars and of Vietnam may be a phenomenon of the past.
- But cf. Malcolm Browne, “Conflicting Censorship Upsets Many Journalists,” The New York Times, Jan. 21, 1991, wherein he describes the labyrinthine procedures to get a pool dispatch cleared. See also Kaiser, “The War and the Press,” The Washington Post, Jan. 27, 1991.
- See transcript of “Nightline” broadcast, Nov. 20, 1990, p. 2.
- N.Y. Times, Dec. 26, 1990, p. A-18; Newsday, Jan. 12, 1991.
- Transcript of “Nightline,” Nov. 20, 1990. p. 2.
- Affidavit of Robert Locke.
- Id.
- See N.Y. Times, Jan. 4, 1991.
- See supra Department of Defense Draft, Dec. 1990—Jan. 3. 1991.
- Exhibit 12, supra. See also N.Y. Times, Jan. 4 and 7, 1991.
- See supra Appendix A. See also, N.Y. Times, Jan. 8, 1991.
- See supra Appendix C.
- Exhibit 18, supra.
- N.Y. Times, Feb. 11 and 12, 1991.
- See supra Appendix D.
- Only 100 reporters cover[ed] a half a million U.S. soldiers. N.Y. Times, Feb. 12, 1991. Only three of 15 pools (each pool had seven members) were in the field on a typical day. N.Y. Times, Feb. 13, 1991.
- Transcript of “CNN Press Goes to War,” Jan. 26, 1991, p. 5.
- Transcript of “Primetime Live,” Jan. 26, 1991, p. 96; American Thought, Jan. 21, 1991, p. 2.
- Transcript of “Nightline,” Jan. 23, 1991, p. 20.
- [Endnotes have been re-organized from the original materials.]
Law & Literature
Volume 3, 1991 - Issue 2