PITTSBURGH – A Pittsburgh investigative journalist contends that “Gag Rule” policies enacted by the Allegheny County Bureau of Corrections violate the First Amendment rights of Allegheny County Jail employees and contractors, and prevent her from developing sources to offer comment for stories detailing events which have taken place inside the jail.
Brittany Hailer filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania on Aug. 17 versus Allegheny County. Both parties are of Pittsburgh.
“This action is brought by investigative journalist Brittany Hailer to enforce her rights under the First Amendment to receive information from employees and contractors of the Allegheny County Jail. Several such personnel wish to speak to Hailer about pressing matters of public concern at the Jail but are prevented from doing so by Jail policies prohibiting all communications about the Jail made without the approval of the Warden or his designee,” the suit states.
“The Jail has housed, on average, 1,553 individuals each day. Over the last three years the Jail has experienced a death rate that is reportedly nearly twice the national average among local jails of similar size. Since April 2020, 20 men have died after entering the Jail. Some died in the facility, while others died at the hospital following their release from the Jail.”
The suit adds that, according to the plaintiff, the Jail faces “serious shortages of correctional officers and medical personnel that put both incarcerated persons and Jail staff at risk” and that “among other consequences, these shortages mean that incarcerated persons often cannot receive timely medical care for chronic or urgent health issues…for example, individuals with diabetes sometimes go days without receiving prescribed insulin and those with bipolar disorder and other mental health conditions wait months for medication and sessions with mental health professionals.”
In one case, the plaintiff asserts that a man held in a temporary housing unit for acutely suicidal persons cried out from his cell for days and was ignored, despite complaining of chest pains, vomiting and disorientation. The man in question died lying on the floor of his cell, according to the suit.
“Plaintiff wants to report on the medical treatment provided to incarcerated people and other conditions and events at the Jail. These are important issues of legitimate public concern, but the Jail has adopted policies that prohibit all employees and contractors from speaking publicly on any issue concerning the Jail without the prior approval of the Warden (the “Gag Rules”). Several Jail employees and contractors want to speak out about problems at the Jail of which the public is unaware, and they would talk to Hailer but for the Gag Rules’ prohibition on all such communications. The Gag Rules effectively keep the public in the dark about issues at the Jail of significant public concern,” the suit says.
“The fears that prevent these Jail employees and contractors from speaking to Hailer and other reporters are not hypothetical. The Gag Rules are strictly enforced, and several individuals have been disciplined for speaking to the press or making public statements without permission. These rules restrict defendant’s employees and contractors from speaking truthfully about matters of public concern that are uniquely within their personal knowledge, even when that speech would not disrupt the internal operations of the Jail. The Gag Rules’ content-based prohibitions against unauthorized communications with the press violate the First Amendment rights of Jail employees and contractors. They also violate plaintiff’s First Amendment right to gather news and receive information from otherwise willing speakers.”
The plaintiff’s argument is that the Gag Rules harm her “directly by depriving [her] of on-the-record sources who could and would provide information essential to her reporting, cause substantial delay in her investigation of allegations of newsworthy events inside the Jail and prevent publication of some newsworthy stories altogether by denying [her] access to on-the-record sources.”
For counts of violating the rights of Hailer and the Bureau Employees under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the plaintiff is seeking the following relief:
• Declare Bureau Policies 605, 624 and 625 (“Code of Ethics/Conduct,” “Access to News Media,” and “Use of Social Media by Employees,” respectively) to violate the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, insofar as they restrict Bureau employees and contractors from disclosing any information about the Jail regardless of its truth or the impact of disclosure on the operation of the Jail;
• Enter an order enjoining defendant, including all of its officers, agents, servants, employees, contractors, and attorneys, and those persons in active concert or participation with defendant who receive actual notice of the injunction, from enforcing the parts of Bureau Policies 605, 624 and 625 that restrict Bureau employees and contractors from disclosing any information about the Jail, or from otherwise engaging in any act limiting a county employee’s ability to speak in his or her capacity as a private citizen about information of public concern acquired during the course of employment with the Bureau;
• Award plaintiff costs and attorneys’ fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section 1988 and 28 U.S.C. Section 2412 and such further relief as it deems just and proper.
The plaintiff is represented by Paula Knudsen Burke of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, in Harrisburg.
The defendant is represented by John A. Bacharach and Lisa G. Michel of the Allegheny County Law Department.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania case 2:23-cv-01480
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com