The first section of this Comment describes the Richards decision. As will be seen, that decision reflects the exercise of judicial discretion to ensure that the quest for discovery under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure does not override other important interests. The validity of that exercise is then examined. Finally, this Comment addresses the constitutional privilege issue left unanswered by Richards. It advances the thesis that academic researchers deserve a qualified first amendment privilege against compulsory disclosure of their confidential sources.
Howard G. Curtis,
Academic Researchers and the First Amendment: Constitutional Protection for Their Confidential Sources,
San Diego L. Rev.
Available at: https://digital.sandiego.edu/sdlr/vol14/iss4/4