Is a Judge’s Order a Threat to a Free Press?

To the Editor:

Re “Judge Upholds Block on The Times’s Coverage of Project Veritas and Adds Order” (news article, Dec. 25) and “Appeals Court Allows New York Times to Keep Project Veritas Memos, for Now” (Business, Dec. 29):

Justice Charles D. Wood has issued an ominous ruling that is clearly breaking with the tradition of a free press that has been established law stemming from the Pentagon Papers case.

In this current case there is not even a hint of a national security breach, yet the judge has allowed Project Veritas to stop The Times from publishing the organization’s memos. We should all be up in arms at what this means to the future of a free press. Only the most sensitive information that could endanger the country should be considered under prior restraint. This case most certainly doesn’t rise to that bar.

Given its name, Project Veritas, it is ironic that the organization is intent on preventing the truth from being printed. But truth may not be its goal.

Ellen Silverman PopperQueens

To the Editor:

Re “A Dangerous Court Ruling” (editorial, Dec. 27):

The court’s determination that attorney-client privilege trumped any First Amendment rights of the journalists appropriately recognized a court’s obligation to protect the attorney-client relationship, which is the heart of our judicial system, from improper invasion.