Feds Drop Media Ban on Katrina Recovery after being taken to court

[Desertdog]

Why hasn't any pro-gun organizations been in the court already.
We need a new gun group. One whose only job is to take government authorties to court when they do anything against the 2nd Amendment.

Feds Drop Media Ban on Katrina Recovery

By DAVID BAUDER
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050910/D8CHM3RO0.html

NEW YORK (AP) - Challenged in court by CNN, the Bush administration agreed on Saturday not to prevent the news media from following the effort to recover the bodies of Hurricane Katrina victims.

The government won't, however, permit photographers to join them in boats or helicopters during the mission to recover bodies from flooded homes.

CNN filed suit against the Federal Emergency Management Agency in U.S. District Court in Houston late Friday, concerned about two statements made by government officials that day. The officials said they didn't believe it was right for the news media to show pictures of Katrina victims.

Terry Ebbert, New Orleans' homeland security director, said the recovery effort would be done with dignity, "meaning that there would be no press allowed." Army Lt. Gen. Russel Honore later said there would be zero access to the recovery operation.

In a hearing Saturday before U.S. District Judge Keith Ellison, Army Lt. Col. Christian DeGraff promised that recovery teams would not bar the media from watching. Satisfied, CNN agreed to put its case on hold.

"We believe very strongly in the free flow of information and felt it was necessary to have access to tell the full story," said Jim Walton, CNN Newsgroup president.

He said CNN has proven in this story and others that it doesn't put gratuitous images on the air.

Army Lt. Col. Richard Steele said that DeGraff's statement didn't represent a change in policy. Reporters can watch recovery efforts they come upon, but they won't be embedded with search teams.

"We're not going to bar, impede or prevent" the media from telling the story, he said. "We're just not going to give the media a ride."

Images of Katrina's victims have frequently been part of the story, and The Associated Press offered such pictures to its members on Saturday. None of them showed victims' faces. The AP picture of a dead body in a wheelchair, wrapped in blankets and resting near a wall, is one of most-remembered images of the tragedy.

"Photographs of flood victims' bodies is part of the overall coverage of Hurricane Katrina," said Cliff Schiappa, the AP's regional photo editor for the Midwest. "When choosing an appropriate image, we do not want to be gratuitous, but rather put the image in context of the flood and suffering. The government is very concerned about the recovery efforts being done in a dignified manner, as it should be done. As members of the media, it's our job to show the world that such an effort is being made and carried out."

Some Bush administration opponents are suspicious that there would be efforts to limit pictures of bodies so the public wouldn't be reminded of the government's response to the storm. They likened it to restrictions against taking pictures of bodies returning from the war in Iraq.

But Walton said he didn't think the "zero access" plans in New Orleans had anything to do with politics.

 

[M-Rex]

Here's the headline I want to see.

Challenged in court by the NRA, GOA, and other pro-gun organizations, the State of Louisiana agreed on Saturday to cease all operations involving the confiscation of firearms from Hurricane Katrina victims residing in the greater New Orleans area impacted by the hurricane, and to halt all forcible evacuations of Louisiana citizens.

 

[lwaldron]

Looking Bad For The NRA

In an email, I promised to join NRA if it did something significant about the confiscations. Well, CNN has already found an open court-room. Where the Hell is the NRA? Maybe looking for a way to betray gun-owners?
Things are looking bad for the NRA.

 

[WT]

Yesterday, NRA leadership, after shooting 3 over par at an exclusive Washington DC area golf course ............ said it was closely monitoring affairs in ....... now where was that????

 

[XLMiguel]

"Photographs of flood victims' bodies is part of the overall coverage of Hurricane Katrina," said Cliff Schiappa, the AP's regional photo editor for the Midwest. "When choosing an appropriate image, we do not want to be gratuitous, but rather put the image in context of the flood and suffering. The government is very concerned about the recovery efforts being done in a dignified manner, as it should be done. As members of the media, it's our job to show the world that such an effort is being made and carried out."

Riiiiiiight - Oh, really? Your job? Based on their current performance, I'd say that the pictures of dead bodies will more likely be sensationalized, morbid, and tacky. Freakin' ghouls

While I think banning the press from 'covering' the events in NO is dumb (and inappropriate), I see no reason why the .gov (i.e. us taxpayers) should pay to carry them along with people actually doing useful work. If they want to take ictures, let them hire their own boats, and make damn sure they stay out of the way while they're out there.

 

[Jeff White]

lwaldron said;

In an email, I promised to join NRA if it did something significant about the confiscations. Well, CNN has already found an open court-room. Where the Hell is the NRA? Maybe looking for a way to betray gun-owners?
Things are looking bad for the NRA.

The NRA can't sue anyone over this. They have not been damaged by the government's confiscation of firearms. CNN does have status as they were directly affected. You can't be party to a lawsuit unless you are involved. The NRA is not directly involved. Why don't you guys just give things a bit of time to shake out?

Jeff

 

[MICHAEL T]

Can't NRA sue for the people that have lost their weapons or because the 2nd being walked all over. They never had a problem screaming about 2nd before but now their not to be found. A real test of the NRA and they Duck and Cover. Bet you get mail wanting money in next week for some reason.
They should change their name to NRMA, National Request Money Association NRA and Jessie sure have a sweet racket going Both extort money by scaring people, and being buddy ,buddy with people in Washington. Yet when comes to a real show down both have a poor record. and can't be found.

 

[joab]

Can't NRA sue for the people that have lost their weapons or because the 2nd being walked all over

They can give legal representation to one of the wronged citizens, if that citizen wants to file a complaint.

You'd think that the NRA could find someone

 

[Old Fuff]

Count The Old Fuff as stnding with Jeff. Unlike gun confiscation, the media issue didn't concern what some would claim was was a serious public security problem that was specifically covered under a Emergency Order issued by the Governor. This might or might not have been true, but it gave the media some leverage, and they could always point to a attempted cover-up.

It just might be better to be last, and right, then to rush forward and be first, but wrong.

If the media suit had been turned down, or the government had decided to fight, the media didn't have a whole lot to lose.

If the NRA, or any other Pro-Gun lobby goes to court and comes out on the short end, we will lose big time.

It is far more likely that the courts, who after all are part of the government, will not rule against the emergency powers of the government, over a gun issue.

Is that really what you want to see?

 

[AZRickD]

The NRA can fund the legal team.

All they need is for someone who actually had a gun confiscated to go through with it.

Rick

 

[xd9fan]

+1 M-Rex......I am waiting too.

 

[Johnny_Yuma]

Why the NRA has not filed suit

Why hasn't any pro-gun organizations been in the court already.

It can't. Well, actually it can but that suit would be dismissed imediately as the NRA lacks standing to file such a suit. In other words, it has not been harmed. You must have standing and been the victim of demonstrable harm to successfully file and prosecute a lawsuit or an request for injuctive relief.

There is nothing the NRA can do in the courts at this point.

CNN, on the other hand, has been directly harmed by the ban on filiming recovery efforts. CNN has standing to file a suit.

I speculate that the reason the NRA has not been able to find anyone with proper standing is that all of them are behind the checkpoints and have little or no contact with the outside world.

 

[AirForceShooter]

Johnny:
BULL
all the NRA has to do is find ONE gun owner who's weapon has been taken, They both march off to a lawyer and the NRA writes a check (I think they remember how to do that) and the guy whose weapon has been taken files suit. That's it.
The injured party has filed and the NRA picks up the tab. Simple.

But that isn't what happens when you "Monitor".

This is EXACTLY what the NRA claims to defend us from in every mailing they do. Well they talk the talk, time to walk the walk.

AFS

 

[Old Fuff]

AirForceShooter:

First thing an NRA Legal Team would have to do is examine past case law, to see if anything similar to this had ever reached the courts, and if so, what happened. Judges tend to follow what is called “precedence” or prior decisions. These could strengthen or weaken a potential suit, depending on what they were. Legal research takes time. I know because it’s something I sometimes do.

At the same time they would have to find an injured (in the legal, not physical sense) party who was willing to go forward with a suit. With the probable victims scattered to heaven knows where that might not be so easy. You would also need to be sure the individuals had a good background. The media would have a field day if your petitioner turned out to be a crack dealer. You would also have to be sure the confiscated firearms were indeed legally owned. Having one or more turn up to be stolen would really do a number on the case.

This would mean that you’d have to have another Team, this time of investigators – probably licensed private detectives – and get them into New Orleans, which again might take some additional legal action as it is quite possible the local authorities would try to keep them out.

These investigators would have to find out EXACTLY what happened, who was in charge, under what authority they were acting, what they took from whom, if the property was properly receipted, and what witnesses might have been present.

They would want to interrogate any and all witnesses they could, and the Legal Team would undoubtedly want to take sworn depositions from some, if not all of them. They would also seek to recover the firearm(s), by subpoena if necessary.

No level of government likes to give up any power – especially emergency powers – so a wise Legal team would expect that State Attorney’s from all over the country (and probably some cities too) would be filing briefs in support of the State of Louisiana or City of New Orleans’ need to have police powers in an emergency to “control and/or confiscate firearms and other dangerous weapons.” Don’t think for one minute these wouldn’t carry weight with any court, including the Supreme Court. They have already ruled that the 1st Amendment right to free speech wouldn’t cover someone who yelled, “fire!” in a crowded theater, and thereby caused a panic.

These are just a few points, but the should make clear why the NRA can’t just rush out and file a suit. If that is done it must be done carefully, and with deliberation. To do otherwise is to invite a ruling that would circumcise the Second Amendment – possibly to the point of making it useless.

There is a real danger that someone else – representing themselves or an organization – may rush out and file a suit that is not thought out and properly prepared. In that case our opponents could rip it to shreds, and in turn cause a decision to be rendered that would be a long way from what we want.

Successful lawsuits take time to prepare. They are also costly. The NRA may seem to be moving slowly, but when the do move they won’t go off half-cocked, and considering what will probably be a substantial array of opponents they will need our financial help too. What you suggested sounded easy. The reality of what would have to be done isn’t.