February 8, 2026
Attorney General Pamela Bondi
Office of the Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530
Harmeet K. Dhillon
Assistant Attorney General
Civil Rights Division
U.S. Department of Justice
150 M Street NE
Washington, DC 20002
The Honorable U.S. Attorney
United States Attorney’s Office
District of Minnesota
300 South Fourth Street, Suite 600
Minneapolis, MN 55415
Delivered via email to: Robert J. Keenan, Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division
Dear Attorney General Bondi, Assistant Attorney General Dhillon, and United States Attorney:
Re: Request for Constitutional Review and Dismissal With Prejudice of Criminal Charges Against Journalist Georgia Ellyse Fort
The Ida B. Wells Media Defense Network is a national coalition of journalists, media advocates, and civil rights defenders committed to safeguarding press freedom, media democracy, and the right to dissent. We write in unequivocal support of Georgia Ellyse Fort, an award-winning independent journalist and veteran reporter who now faces federal criminal charges arising solely from her coverage of a public protest in St. Paul, Minnesota.
Ms. Fort was engaged in routine newsgathering—observing, documenting, and reporting on matters of urgent public concern—conduct that lies at the core of the First Amendment’s guarantees of freedom of speech and of the press. The arrest and prosecution of a journalist for performing these protected functions is antithetical to settled constitutional law, imperils Ms. Fort’s liberty, and threatens to chill lawful reporting nationwide. Criminalizing journalism undermines democratic accountability and the public’s right to know.
Professional Background
Georgia Fort is an award-winning independent journalist with more than fifteen years of professional reporting experience across commercial broadcast and community media. She is a three-time Midwest Emmy Award winner and the creator and executive producer of Here’s the Truth, an independently produced news program recognized with multiple Regional Emmy honors. She is the founder of BLCK Press and the nonprofit Center for Broadcast Journalism and serves as Vice President of the Minnesota Chapter of the National Association of Black Journalists. Her work exemplifies public-interest journalism dedicated to transparency and accountability.
Constitutional Protections for Newsgathering
The Supreme Court and federal courts have consistently recognized that newsgathering and documentation of public events—including protests and police activity—are protected First Amendment activities. The prosecution of a journalist for observing and recording public events is incompatible with this precedent.
Controlling authorities include:
-
Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665, 681 (1972) (“without some protection for seeking out the news, freedom of the press could be eviscerated”);
-
Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555 (1980) (right of press and public to observe governmental proceedings);
-
Glik v. Cunniffe, 655 F.3d 78 (1st Cir. 2011); Fields v. City of Philadelphia, 862 F.3d 353 (3d Cir. 2017); ACLU of Ill. v. Alvarez, 679 F.3d 583 (7th Cir. 2012) (recording police performing official duties in public is protected expressive conduct);
-
Fordyce v. City of Seattle, 55 F.3d 436 (9th Cir. 1995) (recognizing the right to film matters of public interest at demonstrations);
-
Lozman v. City of Riviera Beach, 585 U.S. 115 (2018) (retaliatory arrest claims may proceed even where probable cause exists);
-
Nieves v. Bartlett, 587 U.S. 391 (2019) (government retaliation for protected speech violates the First Amendment);
-
Index Newspapers LLC v. City of Portland, 977 F.3d 817 (9th Cir. 2020) (targeting journalists covering protests likely violates the First Amendment); and
-
in the controlling circuit, Quraishi v. St. Charles County, 986 F.3d 831 (8th Cir. 2021), recognizing that documenting police conduct during demonstrations constitutes protected newsgathering and that law enforcement interference raises serious First and Fourth Amendment concerns.
-
Bartnicki v. Vopper, 532 U.S. 514 (2001) (protecting publication of lawfully obtained information concerning matters of public concern).
Taken together, these cases establish a clear constitutional rule: a journalist’s presence at a protest to observe and report does not transform the journalist into a participant, conspirator, or accomplice. Treating such conduct as criminal intent would effectively criminalize journalism itself.
Public Interest Concerns
This prosecution risks deterring journalists from covering protests, law-enforcement activity, and other contentious public matters. Such chilling effects are precisely what the First Amendment forbids. The Department of Justice bears a special obligation to uphold—not erode—these protections.
Request for Action
For the foregoing reasons, we respectfully request that the Department:
-
Conduct an immediate constitutional review of this prosecution;
-
Dismiss with prejudice all charges arising from Ms. Fort’s lawful news-gathering and reporting activities;
-
Affirm that journalists may observe and document protests and police conduct without fear of arrest or retaliation; and
-
Ensure that lawful reporting is not mischaracterized as conspiracy or criminal participation.
Journalism is not a crime. Bearing witness is not participation. Reporting the truth is not conspiracy.
We stand in solidarity with Georgia Fort and with all journalists who serve the public by documenting matters of urgent public concern.
Respectfully submitted,
Peggy Heinkel-Wolfe and Mimi Rosenberg, Esq.
on behalf of the Ida B. Wells Media Defense Network.
The below-signed individuals and organizations also support this letter:
Individuals:
* required
Organizations:
* required
We will not display your name or personal details on our public website, nor will we share them with anyone other than the recipient of this petition or letter.