How far should freedom of the press extend? This question is at the heart of a heated debate in Seattle.

After the death of George Floyd, protesters took to the streets in Seattle just as they did in many cities across the country. The majority of people protested peacefully. However, others committed crimes including vandalism, looting, and even firebombing police vehicles. Journalists from Seattle's news outlets captured footage of the events, and the Seattle Police Department wanted them to provide the footage for use in their criminal investigations.

A complex legal battle followed, starting with subpoenas issued by police to five local news agencies. They stated that the unreleased footage contained evidence that was vital to their investigation that would help identify people who had committed crimes including theft of firearms. 

The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, along with all five media outlets, argued that the order was a violation of the First Amendment. They claimed that they were protected by Washington State's Shield Law, which makes it illegal to compel reporters to reveal confidential sources.

Eventually, the Seattle Police Department decided to drop their request for the footage, stating that "based on the Supreme Court's decision to delay any ruling on the media's appeal until later next year. In light of excellent work by the assigned case detective in the interim, the department agreed that the prudent decision would be to withdraw the subpoena."

Some believe the police department should have the power to force media outlets to provide raw footage to serve justice. They say that active police investigations take precedence over journalistic freedom, and people who gather footage of others committing crimes should be compelled to provide the evidence to police. On the other hand, some people are concerned that forcing reporters to share unedited material will put the jobs and lives of journalists at risk. They argue that media professionals would be put in a dangerous position because criminals would believe they were performing unofficial surveillance on behalf of the government.

The question up for debate: Should Seattle police have been able to force the press to provide unreleased material to aid in police investigations?