Is Novak Underprivileged?

Susan at Suburban Guerilla points out that there is no unqualified reporter's privilege against compelled testimony and/or production. It's the ol' balancing test.

The U.S. Supreme Court last considered a constitutionally based reporter's privilege in 1972 in Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665 (1972).

Justice Byron White, joined by three other justices, wrote the opinion for the Court, holding that the First Amendment does not protect a journalist who has actually witnessed criminal activity from revealing his or her information to a grand jury. However a concurring opinion by Justice Lewis Powell and a dissenting opinion by Justice Potter Stewart recognized a qualified privilege for reporters. The privilege as described by Stewart weighs the First Amendment rights of reporters against the subpoenaing party's need for disclosure.

Thirty days in the hole might well test Novakula's loyalty to the two senior Administration officials (neither of which is Karl Rove, honest) who may have committed a crime by speaking to Novak. Heck, thirty minutes might do it.