National Newspaper Association welcomes important decision on reporters’ rights, expresses concern about the court's next steps

Apr 3, 2026

The National Newspaper Association today welcomed a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that affirms the rights of journalists to do their jobs without retaliatory actions by the federal government.

It noted the Ninth Circuit has sent instructions to a lower court to design remedies that are more narrowly targeted at the journalists who originally brought the suit.

NNA joined 44 other news organizations in a friend of the court brief sponsored by Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press to defend reporters’ rights. Journalists claimed they had been injured by pepper balls, tear gas and rubber bullets fired by federal officers from Department of Homeland Security during demonstrations against anti-immigrant raids in Los Angeles.

A lawsuit by the Los Angeles Press Club yesterday produced a decision by the appeals court that found journalists likely would prevail in claims that their First Amendment rights had been violated in the DHS enforcement actions.

The decision being appealed came from a federal district court that found “federal agents’ indiscriminate use of force targeting journalists standing far from any protest activity, launching scorching-hot tear gas canisters directly at people, and shooting projectiles at protesters attempting to comply with dispersal orders would… undoubtedly chill the media’s efforts to cover these public events and protestors seeking to express peacefully their views on national policies.”

The Appeals Court agreed that First Amendment violations likely had occurred. But it found the lower court’s remedies were too broad and sent the case back for more action.

When the district court prohibited firing of tear gas canisters aimed at “any person,” it went too far, said the Ninth Circuit. Protecting journalists as well as others from crowd dispersal orders was also too broad, as was a requirement for audible warnings before crowd control actions were taken. The requirements would benefit people other than the journalists who sued, the appellate court said. It sent the case back for more work to tailor remedies aimed to more closely benefit only the journalists who sued.

“NNA participated in this case because our newspapers’ journalists were put into harm's way unnecessarily when they covered immigration protests,” NNA Chair Martha Diaz Aszkenazy, publisher of the San Fernando (California) Valley Sun and El Sol Newspapers, said. “We welcome the Ninth Circuit’s support for keeping them safe. And we agree that remedies should not unnecessarily tie the hands of the federal government. But we cannot believe that the appeals court means to leave the general public unprotected by tear gas and pepper balls being fired into crowds without warning, just because each person affected did not file a lawsuit. The court cannot mean to provoke such a burden for citizens or the courts. So, we will be watching with great interest as the district court tackles the problem again."

She continued, “Bottom line for us: we want our reporters to be safe when they do their jobs. We also want our readers to be safe if they exercise their own First Amendment rights. And we must support reasonable efforts by the federal government to enforce the law. In the end, the balance has to tilt toward the First Amendment. We will stand up for that principle every day of the week.”

She thanked Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, the Los Angeles Press Club and others for pursuing the case.