IAPP CIPP/US Practice Exam

Category - Professional

A student newspaper at a prestigious university is requested by police through a warrant once law enforcement suspects the media source may be in possession of photographs needed for an investigation of a medical facility. Which of the following is true about this scenario?
  1. The newspaper is obligated to comply.
  2. The law provides the newspaper with protections against searches and seizures.
  3. A subpoena by law enforcement is too broad and not calculated to lead to admissible evidence and may be quashed.
  4. A subpoena by law enforcement violates the newspapers 1st and 4th amendment rights.
Explanation
Answer: B - The Privacy Protection Act of 1980 provides the newspaper with protections against searches and seizures by the government, including law enforcement.  Media outlets are considered the press as they disseminate information to the public. Unless the press organization is suspected of a crime or a life-threatening situation exists, the media company is not obligated to comply with the warrant.

This law stems from a case filed by The Stanford Daily. The newspaper claimed protections to a warrant under First and Fourth Amendments of the United States Constitution. The newspaper asserted that this type of search would have fallen under a subpoena discovery request rather than a warrant. Although the Supreme Court ruled against the Plaintiff in this case, legislatures later enacted the Privacy Protection Act of 1980.
Was this helpful? Upvote!
Login to contribute your own answer or details

Top questions

Related questions

Most popular on PracticeQuiz