Defending Press Freedom and Expressive Rights
At Acosta Law, our media law practice stands at the intersection of journalism, constitutional rights, and a rapidly evolving digital landscape. We understand that a free press serves as the ultimate guardian of democratic values, and we've dedicated our practice to ensuring those freedoms remain robust in the face of legal challenges.
Our work has included defending journalists against libel claims, fighting improper subpoenas seeking confidential sources, challenging prior restraint attempts, and securing access to government information through FOIA litigation. We have particular expertise in representing non-traditional and alternative media outlets that challenge established narratives and power structures, recognizing that these voices often face the most severe legal threats.
Our Media Law Services
Defamation Defense
We defend journalists, bloggers, and publishers against defamation claims, developing robust defenses based on truth, opinion protection, fair report privilege, and public figure doctrine.
- Pre-publication review
- Strategic litigation responses to SLAPP suits
- Anti-SLAPP motions and appeals
- Trial and appellate representation
- International libel concerns
Reporter's Privilege
We fight to protect journalists' sources and unpublished materials from compelled disclosure, leveraging shield laws, the First Amendment, and common law protections for newsgathering.
- Subpoena challenges in civil and criminal contexts
- Grand jury testimony opposition
- Protection of confidential sources
- Defense against search warrants
- Digital data protection strategies
Prior Restraint Challenges
We vigorously oppose attempts to prevent publication, recognizing that prior restraints represent the most severe infringement on press freedom and face the heaviest presumption against constitutional validity.
- Emergency response to threatened injunctions
- National security publication disputes
- Gag order opposition
- Sealed court record challenges
- Expedited appeals of restraining orders
Access to Information
We help journalists and media organizations obtain access to government records, court proceedings, and other information necessary for meaningful reporting on matters of public concern.
- FOIA and state public records litigation
- Court access and unsealing motions
- Meeting access under open meetings laws
- Campaign finance and government data access
- Administrative hearing access
Our Approach to Media Law
Media law requires both deep legal expertise and a practical understanding of journalistic realities. Our approach combines:
- Rapid Response: We recognize that media law emergencies—such as threatened injunctions or source protection issues—require immediate action and maintain protocols for emergency representation.
- Constitutional Focus: We ground our advocacy in robust First Amendment principles, continually updating our arguments to address emerging technologies and changing media landscapes.
- Risk Assessment: We help clients navigate the balance between journalistic imperatives and legal risks, providing realistic assessments that respect editorial independence while mitigating unnecessary exposure.
- International Perspective: As journalism increasingly crosses borders, we maintain awareness of international press freedom concerns, including foreign libel laws, cross-border data issues, and reporter safety in hostile environments.
- Technological Adaptation: We stay current with digital media innovations, developing legal strategies that address the unique challenges of online publishing, social media, and digital newsgathering.
Notable Media Law Cases
Desert Chronicle v. Nevada Gaming Commission (2020)
Successfully challenged blanket confidentiality provisions in gaming regulations that prevented reporting on disciplinary proceedings against casino operators, establishing new transparency in regulatory oversight.
Martinez v. Southwest Digital Media (2018)
Defended independent news site against defamation claims brought by public official, securing dismissal under anti-SLAPP statute and establishing important precedent for small digital publishers.
In re Anonymous Source Proceedings (2016)
Prevented compelled disclosure of confidential source in high-profile corruption investigation, successfully arguing for broader interpretation of Nevada's shield law to encompass digital-native journalists.
