GovernmentExecutive.com

Larry Flynt, publisher of Hustler magazine has lost a court battle against the Defense Department over media access to U.S. troops in combat operations.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. District on Feb. 3 upheld a lower court's ruling that the media does not have a constitutional right to be embedded with U.S. military forces in combat.

On Oct. 30, 2001, Flynt wrote a letter to Victoria Clarke, Defense assistant secretary for public affairs, requesting that Hustler correspondents "be permitted to accompany ground troops on combat missions and that said correspondents be allowed free access to the theater of United States military operations in Afghanistan and other countries where hostilities may be occurring as part of Operation Enduring Freedom."

Clarke responded by notifying Flynt that access to ground operations was not possible because "the only U.S. troops on the ground in Afghanistan are small numbers of servicemen involved in special operations activity." Clarke informed Flynt of the department's directive for media access. She also suggested that Flynt request access through the Navy's Fifth Fleet public affairs office, and provided him with contact information.

In court, lawyers for Flynt challenged the Defense directive and said the media has a First Amendment right to go into battle with the military. The court disagreed.

"The [factual] challenge is premised on the assertion that there is a First Amendment right for legitimate press representatives to travel with the military, and to be accommodated and otherwise facilitated by the military in their reporting efforts during combat, subject only to reasonable security and safety restrictions," the court stated. "There is nothing we have found in the Constitution, American history, or our case law to support this claim."

The court also noted that Hustler correspondent David Buchbinder eventually went to Afghanistan and filed several stories, at least one of which indicated that he accompanied troops on a search for al Qaeda operatives.

Nonviolent Outburst

The acting secretary of Housing and Urban Development did not break an agency workplace violence policy during an October 2003 outburst against federal employee union members, investigators concluded.

While Alphonso Jackson made "forceful and direct" remarks at an Oct. 20, 2003, Los Angeles field office meeting, he did not threaten violence or physical intimidation, HUD Inspector General Kenneth Donohue, said in a Jan. 29, 2004, letter to Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif. Consequently, Jackson did not violate HUD's Workplace Violence Policy, the IG reasoned.

In early January, Waxman asked Donohue to look into allegations that Jackson bullied members of the National Federation of Federal Employees Local 1450 in the course of the Los Angeles meeting. Waxman requested a speedy investigation since Jackson, who took over acting HUD secretary when Mel Martinez left to run for a Senate seat, has been nominated to fill the position permanently.

HUD is working with the Federal Labor Relations Authority to reach a settlement on separate union complaints that Jackson violated federal laws in his outburst.

The comments that touched off Jackson's legal wrangles were simply intended to improve management at HUD's Los Angeles field office, Jerry Brown, an agency spokesman, has claimed. That field office received extremely low marks in a quarterly management review completed in the summer, ranking near the bottom of HUD's 81 field offices in performance.

But Waxman has said he is concerned that the outburst broke a HUD policy prohibiting "intimidation, threats, harassment, bullying or other forms of aggressive or disruptive behavior." At the October meeting, Jackson allegedly said: "When I was a child, it took my father three whuppings to get the message through to me. And that's what I am prepared to do. I do not want any more problems from this field office."

COMMENTS

• Will someone PLEASE inform HUD IG Kenneth Donohue he's got the bridle on the wrong end of the horse again?! Look, I'll make it so simple even a high muckety muck like Kenny can understand. Let's say we reverse the situation shall we? You mean to tell me that if the union folks had pulled a stunt like this on Al Jackson they wouldn't have charges filed against them and be out the door? PLEASE! Let's not be insulting here shall we. Essentially the illustrious IG is telling us; it may look like a donkey, it may sound like a donkey and it may smell like a donkey. But it ain't a donkey. Okay, I give up. But, it sure looks like a donkey to me. Art Doss Posted February 13, 2004 12:17 PM