City of Cleveland subpoenas newsroom, judge quashes request

The Marshall Project was served a subpoena by the City of Cleveland on June 26, 2024, in connection with a wrongful termination lawsuit against the Ohio city. A federal judge quashed the request Oct. 28.

Marshall Project staff reporter Wilbert Cooper authored an article in May about Vincent Montague, a Black former police sergeant in the Cleveland Division of Police who filed a lawsuit against multiple high-ranking officers and the city after he was fired in December 2021. The article included Montague’s allegation that he was dismissed because of his connection to the Black Lives Matter movement.

According to court filings reviewed by the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker, an attorney representing the city contacted Cooper in May 2024 seeking “copies of any recordings of [his] conversations with Mr. Montague, either audio filed or written notes.” Marshall Project attorney Jason Criss responded on the journalist’s behalf, stating that neither Cooper nor the newsroom would provide the work product.

The city’s attorney subpoenaed The Marshall Project on June 26, after first improperly emailing the subpoena to Criss on June 13. The subpoena ordered the outlet to turn over unpublished work product, interview notes and communications with Montague concerning his interactions with the former chief of police and any employees of the division, as well as a bar owner convicted of bribing police.

The Marshall Project filed a motion to quash the subpoena July 9 in U.S. District Court in New York, where the news organization is headquartered. Criss argued that the requests are a clear violation of the state’s well-established journalist’s privilege and a clear attempt to leverage the outlet’s reporting against Montague in the civil case.

“By issuing the Subpoena to TMP, Cleveland seeks to do exactly what federal law prohibits,” Criss wrote. “Journalists cannot foster and maintain trust with sources if the public perceives them to be the unwitting accomplices of civil litigants.”

District Judge Valerie Caproni granted the motion to quash Oct. 28, ruling that the materials were protected under the state’s shield law and rejecting the city’s argument that it couldn’t obtain comparable statements from Montague during a deposition because it is not “a relaxed neutral setting.”

“If the Court were to accept Cleveland’s argument, it would eviscerate the protection accorded by the journalist’s privilege,” Caproni wrote.

Criss told the Tracker that while his law firm was representing The Marshall Project pro bono, the legal fees from fighting such subpoenas can cripple newsrooms. He also noted that the city fought for the case to be heard in Ohio under the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, where journalists have far weaker protections, rather than in New York, covered by the 2nd Circuit.

“Unfortunately, what it shows is the variation in protections for journalists around the country,” he said. “If there was a federal shield law that sort of leveled up the law around the country to be what we enjoy in the 2nd Circuit, that would be a very welcome development.”