Privacy Protection Act of 1980
The Privacy Protection Act of 1980 is a significant piece of legislation in the United States aimed at safeguarding the rights of individuals and organizations engaged in the preparation of materials for public dissemination. Emerging from heightened concerns over government searches of newsrooms in the 1970s, the Act was signed into law by President Jimmy Carter in response to the Supreme Court's decision in *Zurcher v. The Stanford Daily*, which allowed such searches. This law protects against government seizure of work products by prohibiting officials from obtaining warrants to search for or seize materials intended for public release, thereby extending its protective reach beyond journalists to all who prepare materials for publication.
Key exceptions to the law exist, notably in cases involving probable criminal activity or when human life is at risk. The Act emphasizes respect for personal privacy and mandates that the least intrusive methods be employed in any search for materials. While the law seeks to prevent interference with confidential relationships, violations are addressed not through criminal penalties but through civil litigation, allowing affected individuals to seek damages. However, the Act includes provisions that may exempt law enforcement officers from liability under certain circumstances, complicating its enforcement. Overall, the Privacy Protection Act of 1980 represents an important step in balancing the interests of information dissemination with the need for individual privacy and protection against government overreach.
Privacy Protection Act of 1980
Enacted: October 13, 1980
Place: United States (national)
Significance: This federal law increased protections against unreasonable government searches of newsrooms by requiring officials to secure subpoenas
The United States has never had a national shield law giving journalists special privileges to protect their news sources. The Privacy Protection of 1980 arose from incidents occurring during the 1970’s that heightened congressional awareness of the need for greater protection of news gatherers. In 1971 police searching for evidence in a criminal investigation rifled the offices of Stanford University’s student newspaper. When the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the power of government to conduct such searches armed only with court-issued warrants, in Zurcher v. The Stanford Daily (1978), the nation’s press was outraged. President Jimmy Carter responded by proposing legislation to protect newspapers and others from such searches. Fresh incidents of government invasions of newsrooms around this same time moved Congress to pass legislation, which Carter signed into law in October, 1980. The Privacy Protection Act of 1980—also known as the News Room Search Law—went into effect for the federal government the following New Year’s Day, and for state and local governments exactly one year later.
Avoiding a problem common to such legislation, the new law did not single out the press for protection. Instead, it offered protection to all persons preparing material for publication. The law specifically forbade government officials from either seeking or issuing warrants to search for, or to seize, any work owned by persons “reasonably believed to have a purpose to disseminate [it] to the public.” Its protections covered documentary materials, including magnetically or electronically recorded cards, tapes, and computer media; and any work product materials, created for the purpose of disseminating information to the public. The law exempted cases in which there is “probable cause to believe” that the custodians of the work in question have committed, or are planning to commit, criminal acts to which the materials relate. Also exempted were instances in which seizure of material is necessary to save human life, or in which the custodians would not comply with a valid subpoena, or try to hide or destroy material if a search is not undertaken.
The act established guidelines for federal officers mandating that recognition be given to the personal privacy of those holding the materials sought and requiring that the least intrusive means be used to obtain materials needed by the government. That act further mandated that care be given not to impair confidential relationships, such as those between doctor and patient or attorney and client, and required that except in rare and genuine emergencies, only a government attorney can authorize search and seizure under one of the exceptions built into the act.
Violations of the act are not punishable under criminal law, but aggrieved persons can seek redress against offenders in the civil courts. Damages are limited to actual damages, but the act is weakened by language that says a “reasonable good faith belief in the lawfulness of his conduct” would excuse an officer who violated the terms of the act.