\n<\/p>\n
\n\tUPDATED: <\/strong>A judge has barred the U.S. government from reviewing materials seized from the home of Washington Post reporter Hannah Natanson until the court gives its authorization.<\/p>\n \n\tMagistrate Judge William Porter issued the order on Wednesday, hours after the Post, in a court filing, sought a court order demanding the return of Natanson\u2019s electronic devices like laptops and a mobile phone.<\/p>\n \n\tPorter wrote that the Post had shown \u201cgood cause\u201d to \u201cmaintain the status quo\u201d until the government can respond to their filing and he can \u201cmore fully address\u201d the issues.<\/p>\n \n\tThe judge gave the government until Jan. 28 to respond, with oral argument scheduled for Feb. 6.<\/p>\n \n\tIn their filing, the Post called the seizure of Natanson\u2019s devices last week an \u201cunconstitutional prior restraint.\u201d Its attorneys wrote that the seizure \u201cchills speech, cripples reporting, and inflicts irreparable harm every day the government keeps its hands on protected materials.\u201d<\/p>\n \n\t\u201cThe government cannot meet its heavy burden to justify this intrusion, and it has ignored narrower, lawful alternatives,\u201d the Post\u2019s attorneys wrote. \u201cThe Court should order the immediate return of all seized materials. Anything less would license future newsroom raids and normalize censorship by search warrant.\u201d<\/p>\n \n\tNatanson\u2019s materials were seized as part of a government investigation of Aurelio Perez-Lugones, a system administrator who has a security clearance and is accused of retaining classified intelligence reports. <\/p>\n \n\tOn Jan. 14, agents searched the reporter\u2019s home and her devices and seized a\u00a0phone, two laptops and a Garmin watch, according to the Post. One of the computers was issued to the reporter by the Post, the other was her personal laptop, the Post said.<\/p>\n \n\tNatanson has done extensive reporting on federal workers who have been targeted for firings and resignations by the Trump administration. She has chronicled how she had become the \u201cfederal government whisperer,\u201d amassing hundreds of sources as workers inundated her with tips.<\/p>\n \n\tThe Post\u2019s attorneys wrote that the devices seized \u201ccontain years of information about past and current confidential sources and other unpublished newsgathering materials, including those she was using for current reporting. Almost none of the seized data is even potentially responsive to the warrant, which seeks only records received from or relating to a single government contractor. The seized data is core First Amendment-protected material, and some is protected by the attorney-client privilege.\u201d<\/p>\n \n\tThe Post\u2019s attorneys wrote that the seizure \u201chad the practical effect of suppressing The Post and Natanson\u2019s current and future journalism, including because the seizure has prevented her from communicating with her more than 1,100 sources, who run the gamut of federal officials from more than 120 agencies or subagencies, and who overwhelmingly and self-evidently have nothing to do with the warrant. Nor are Natanson\u2019s confidential sources likely to work with her again, if the government is permitted to rummage through her files unchecked.\u201d<\/p>\n \n\tIn a declaration, Natanson said that she had never communicated with Perez-Lugones \u201cvia any platform other than Signal or phone.\u201d She said that in reporting, she would receive dozens to more than 100 tips from sources, but since the seizure, \u201cthat number has fallen to zero.\u201d<\/p>\n \n\tAccording to the filing, Trump administration lawyers have so far refused any agreement on how to handle the seized materials, but stated that it \u201cwas still in the process of preserving data and had not yet started reviewing it,\u201d according to the Post\u2019s filing.<\/p>\n \n\tBruce Brown, president of the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press, said in a statement, \u201cThis is the first time in U.S. history that the government has searched a reporter\u2019s home in a national security media leak investigation, seizing potentially a vast amount of confidential data and information. The move imperils public interest reporting and will have ramifications far beyond this specific case. It is critical that the court blocks the government from searching through this material until it can address the profound threat to the First Amendment posed by the raid.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n