Judge doesn’t trust DOJ with search of devices seized from Wash. Post reporter

A federal court has stepped in to oversee the examination of devices taken from a Washington Post reporter, following a magistrate judge's doubts about the Department of Justice's reliability in handling the search independently. US Magistrate Judge William Porter expressed concerns over the government's failure to include crucial details in its search warrant application. Porter revealed that the court was unaware of a 1980 law that restricts the search and seizure of journalists' materials when it granted the original warrant. This decision comes six weeks after the FBI executed the warrant at the Virginia residence of reporter Hannah Natanson. While Porter declined to immediately return the seized devices to Natanson and the Post, he established a court-led process to ensure that the search focuses solely on materials pertinent to a criminal case involving an alleged leaker who had communicated with Natanson. The judge also revoked the section of the warrant that allowed the government to access and review all seized data. In his ruling, Porter noted that the government had only demonstrated probable cause for a small portion of the materials taken. He cautioned that permitting a broad search of a reporter's work could lead to an unconstitutional general warrant. Furthermore, he highlighted that the government's proposed search strategy would contravene its own guidelines, which stipulate that warrants aimed at the press must be narrowly defined to minimize disruption to newsgathering efforts. Porter rejected the government's proposal to utilize its own 'filter team' for the search, emphasizing the risks involved. He articulated that permitting the government’s team to sift through a reporter’s work—much of which includes unrelated information from confidential sources—would be akin to entrusting the fox with guarding the henhouse at the Washington Post.