The decision towards PG may additional defend reporters from racism. Information | Pittsburgh

click to enlarge

CP photo illustration: Abbey Adams; CP Photo source: Lisa Cunningham

2020, Yuan Pittsburgh Post Gazette employee Alexis Johnson sued her former employer on suspicion of civil rights violations carried out by the newspaper.

Johnson, who is black and has had a job with VICE since then, was later banned by management for covering the ongoing protests against Black Lives Matter Floyd.

Recent decisions in Johnson’s case could have a bigger impact and provide journalists with additional legal protection.

In the lawsuit to dismiss the case, the first amendment protected the treatise from Johnson’s allegations of discrimination, claiming that the treatise made editorial choices to discipline Johnson.

When I picked up that story in the December 2020 Pittsburgh City Paper, said Jerry Dickinson, law professor and constitutional scholar at the University of Pittsburgh. CP NS Post Zwickel The motion to dismiss is a rare area of ​​law, and it is not common for media companies to say that the First Amendment is superior to non-discrimination cases.

On August 17, Judge J. Nicholas Ranjan of the US District Court of Justice requested a motion to dismiss the newspaper’s decision to discipline Joesnon on the grounds that it was not protected by the First Amendment. Ranjan, appointed by ex-President Donald Trump, Post Zwickel I made a hiring decision.

“The First Amendment gives publishers absolute discretion not to publish content, but that discretion does not allow publishers to make discriminatory personnel decisions.” Ranjan wrote in the ruling.

Johnson’s attorney Sam Cordes said Law360 That Post gusset enabled this paper to create an “isolated newsroom” and claim immunity under the First Amendment.

According to Dickinson, this is an “important decision” not only for Johnson himself but also for other aspiring journalists who their owners may face with similar allegations. He says federal court rulings should set an additional precedent in cases of discrimination against journalists against their employers.

“This is PG. You can’t short-circuit accountability by hiding behind the First Amendment to guard against discriminatory behavior, ”says Dickinson. “The matter in dispute is clearly sufficient and the proceedings can continue. Behind the case was the Black Lives Matter movement following the murder of George Floyd and protests against racial justice. We do not want Article 1 of the constitutional amendment to be armed against racial progress. It is dangerous. ”

The verdict against PG could further protect reporters from racism. News | Pittsburgh

Source link The verdict against PG can further protect reporters from racism. News | Pittsburgh

Comments are closed.