New Bill Proposes Federal Charges for Assaulting Journalists: Up to 6 Years Prison Time

The "Journalist Protection Act" aims to establish new federal criminal offenses for intentionally assaulting journalists. If passed, this act would amend existing federal law to penalize individuals who cause bodily injury to a journalist while they are newsgathering, or with the intent to stop them from doing so, with fines and/or imprisonment for up to 3 years. For causing "serious bodily injury" under the same circumstances, as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1365(h), the penalties could increase to a fine and/or imprisonment for up to 6 years. The core idea is to offer a new layer of federal protection to those reporting on events of public interest.

Defining the Front Line: Who's a 'Journalist' Anyway?

Okay, so first things first: Section 2 of the bill tries to nail down who exactly gets this new protection. It defines a "journalist" as someone working for a news outlet or anyone "who engages in newsgathering with the intent to report on events of public interest." "Newsgathering" itself is defined as regularly collecting, preparing, or reporting news. Now, this sounds straightforward, but in the age of Substack, podcasts, and citizen reporting, terms like "regularly" and "intent to report" could become sticky wickets. Does your favorite independent YouTuber covering local council meetings count? What about someone live-streaming a protest for the first time? The bill aims for broad coverage, but these definitions might lead to some head-scratching when it comes to who's in and who's out, especially for freelancers or those not tied to big media houses. This is where some of that medium-level vagueness noted in early analyses pops up – clarity will be key in how this is interpreted and could determine whether independent or citizen journalists are consistently covered.

The Nitty-Gritty: What's the Crime and What's the Time?

This act isn't messing around with penalties. Section 2 lays out two main prohibited actions. First, intentionally causing "bodily injury" to a journalist who's on the job (or to stop them from doing their job) could land someone a fine and up to 3 years behind bars. The bill references 18 U.S.C. 1365(h) for what constitutes "bodily injury." Second, if that injury becomes "serious bodily injury" – again, defined by that same existing federal statute (18 U.S.C. 1365(h)) as involving things like a substantial risk of death or protracted disfigurement – the stakes jump to a fine and up to 6 years in prison. The key here is intent: prosecutors would need to prove the harm was done deliberately, either while the journalist was working or specifically to hinder their newsgathering. Proving that specific intent can often be a high bar in court.

On the Ground: More Protection or More Questions?

So, what does this mean for folks in the real world? For working journalists, from local newspaper reporters to network correspondents, this bill could offer an added layer of federal protection. The idea is that knowing federal charges are on the table might make someone think twice before getting physical. It amends Chapter 7 of Title 18, United States Code, which already deals with various assault charges, essentially carving out a new Section 120, "Assault against journalists." The beneficiaries are pretty clear: journalists and the news organizations they work for, who want their people safe while covering potentially tense situations. On the flip side, individuals convicted under this new section would face those federal penalties. The challenge, as mentioned, will be in consistently applying those definitions of "journalist" and "newsgathering," and in proving the specific intent to harm or impede newsgathering. While the aim is to safeguard the flow of information by protecting those who gather it, its practical effectiveness will hinge on how these terms are interpreted and enforced day-to-day.