A federal appeals court blocked the Trump administration's attempt to secretly seize 18 months of journalists' private LinkedIn messages, ruling that the dragnet endangered the confidential sources that sustain investigative reporting.
Three judges unanimously found that the Justice Department's demand reached far beyond its hunt for a military leaker and trampled First Amendment protections.
The government had asked LinkedIn to hand over extensive data on reporters who collectively published more than 1,000 articles, pulling in people with no conceivable connection to the leak inquiry. Many of them simply list contact information on the platform to invite sources to reach out.
The court also flagged a secrecy order that barred LinkedIn from disclosing the demand for a full year, leaving journalists in the dark while their communications were quietly reviewed.
Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III ordered a lower court to drastically narrow the request and to weigh a limited plan that would notify a single attorney for the targeted news outlet. He warned that scooping up reporters' records wholesale would tilt the balance against informed discourse and democratic health, while stressing there is legal room for both security and speech.
Microsoft, which owns LinkedIn, called the ruling an important win for privacy and press freedom. The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press hailed it as one of the leading opinions protecting reporters, saying the court recognized confidential sources as the lifeblood of investigative journalism.