Interpretation of Wiretapping Statutes Implicates First Amendment
Participated in an amicus brief (with the Reporters Committee and other amici) filed with the Michigan Supreme Court in AFT Michigan v. Project Veritas. The case involves whether Michigan’s wiretapping statutes prohibit recording a conversation without the consent of all parties to the conversation. The amicus brief urges the Michigan Supreme Court to adopt the traditional one-party consent interpretation of the statutes. It argues that this interpretation serves vital First Amendment interests, as journalists often rely on recordings provided by whistleblowers and other sources, which may be recorded without the consent of all parties to the conversation. The brief further argues that requiring the consent of all parties could result in a chilling effect that would deprive the public of information on matters of significant concern.