WASHINGTON — Setting up a potential confrontation with the Bush administration over press freedoms, the House on Tuesday overwhelmingly passed legislation to extend new protections to journalists and their confidential sources.
The so-called shield law would for the first time establish standards that limit the power of federal authorities to compel reporters to testify or to disclose documents and unidentified sources they have used in their reporting.
The bill passed, 398 to 21, with broad bipartisan support after several high-profile cases in which journalists faced jail time for refusing to reveal sources. With 176 Republicans joining 222 Democrats, the measure far exceeded the two-thirds needed to override a veto.
"In recent years, the press has been under assault," said House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.). "It's . . . Congress' responsibility to ensure that the press is able to perform its job adequately. . . . This measure balances the public's right to know against the legitimate and important interests society has in maintaining public safety."
A similar bill attracted broad bipartisan support when the Senate Judiciary Committee approved it, 15 to 2, earlier this month.
Even if the federal shield law wins Senate passage, it faces staunch opposition from the White House, which warned Tuesday that the law "would produce immediate harm to national security and law enforcement" by encouraging leaks and hampering the government's ability to prosecute terrorism cases.
The administration warned of a veto if it is sent to the president.
More than 30 states have shield laws that protect journalists in state courts. And in more than 15 other states, the courts have recognized reporters' rights to protect their sources.
Tuesday's House vote comes after a more than 30-year campaign by media organizations for a law to prevent journalists from being forced to divulge their sources in federal court.
"Today's vote in the House is a victory for a free press and for the American people as much as journalists," said Clint Brewer, president of the Society of Professional Journalists.
The movement was born in response to the 1972 Supreme Court decision in Branzburg vs. Hayes, which concluded journalists do not have an unqualified 1st Amendment protection against grand jury subpoenas. But until recently, it had made little headway in Congress.
