Pa. Cons. Stat. » 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. (JUDICIARY) / Chapter 59
Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes

42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5942 (2026)

  Confidential communications to news reporters.

✓ current as of May 2026
Coverage note: this corpus holds the consolidated Pa.C.S. titles only. Unconsolidated P.S. statutes (UTPCPL 73 P.S. § 201-1, Liquor Code, wage payment laws) are not included; a miss here does not mean the statute does not exist. Check palegis.us.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section PA-LEGpalegis.us JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§ 5942.  Confidential communications to news reporters.

(a)  General rule.--No person engaged on, connected with, or employed by any newspaper of general circulation or any press association or any radio or television station, or any magazine of general circulation, for the purpose of gathering, procuring, compiling, editing or publishing news, shall be required to disclose the source of any information procured or obtained by such person, in any legal proceeding, trial or investigation before any government unit.

(b)  Exception.--The provisions of subsection (a) insofar as they relate to radio or television stations shall not apply unless the radio or television station maintains and keeps open for inspection, for a period of at least one year from the date of the actual broadcast or telecast, an exact recording, transcription, kinescopic film or certified written transcript of the actual broadcast or telecast.

 

Cross References.  Section 5942 is referred to in sections 4415, 4436 of this title; sections 566, 586 of Title 2 (Administrative Law and Procedure).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 39 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1981–2025 · leading case: Commonwealth v. Bowden, 838 A.2d 740 (Pa. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Commonwealth v. Bowden, 838 A.2d 740 (Pa. 2003). · cites it 16× “This appeal concerns the scope of the Pennsylvania Shield Law, 42 Pa.C.S. § 5942, the reach of the qualified reporters' privilege to refuse to disclose sources and materials, and the propriety of a contempt sanction imposed on two reporters for refusing to provide prosecutors…”
Castellani v. Scranton Times, L.P., 956 A.2d 937 (Pa. 2008). · cites it 6× “Pennsylvania's Shield Law, 42 Pa.C.S. § 5942, protects a newspaper's source of information from compelled disclosure.”
Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc. v. Hepps, 475 U.S. 767 (1986). · cites it 2× “See 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5942 (a) (1982) ("No person .”
Hatchard v. Westinghouse Broad. Co., 504 A.2d 211 (Pa. 1986). · cites it 8× “3 The motion sought: (1) all tapes, film, transcripts and other documentary material prepared by KYW during its investigation of Hatchard, but “excluding any such material that would reveal the identity of your sources pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. § 5942;” and (2) all tapes, film and…”
Sprague v. Walter, 543 A.2d 1078 (Pa. 1988). · cites it 4× “Section 5942 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa. C.S. § 5942, which throughout this lawsuit has been referred to as the “Shield Law”, provides in pertinent part: Confidential communications to news reporters (a) General rule.”
Castellani, R., Aplts. v. Scranton Times, 124 A.3d 1229 (Pa. 2015). · cites it 2× “The Superior Court reversed the order granting disclosure, and, on further appeal, this Court affirmed the Superior Court, stating that the Pennsylvania Shield Law, 42 Pa.C.S. § 5942, prohibited compelled disclosure of the identity of the confidential source.”
Norton v. Glenn, 860 A.2d 48 (Pa. 2004). · cites it 2× “In Sprague , this Court addressed the Shield Law privilege, 42 Pa.C.S. § 5942, which affords the media *61 a right to conceal the identity of confidential sources.”
Curran v. Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc., 439 A.2d 652 (Pa. 1981). · cites it 2× “[4] Our disposition makes it unnecessary to decide whether, under Pennsylvania's "Shield Law," 42 Pa.C.S. § 5942, appellant would have been permitted to depose appellee's reporters.”
Williams v. Am. Broad. Companies, Inc., 96 F.R.D. 658 (W.D. Ark. 1983). · cites it 4× “Thus, the argument naturally arises that the Arkansas Supreme Court would interpret section 43-917 to protect out-takes, as the Pennsylvania courts have interpreted 42 Pa.Cons.Stat.Ann. § 5942 to do so. To date, the only Arkansas case interpreting section 43-917 is Saxton .”
In Re the Twenty-Fourth Statewide Investigating Grand Jury, 907 A.2d 505 (Pa. 2006). · cites it 2× “§§ 2000aa-2000aa-12, and newspaper source information protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, as well as the Pennsylvania Shield Law, 42 Pa.C.S. § 5942. The supervising judge denied the motion to quash; however, he directed that the examination of the…”
Glenn R. Funk v. Scripps Media, Inc., 570 S.W.3d 205 (Tenn. 2019). “) ); 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 5942 (West, Westlaw through 2018 Reg.”
Hatchard v. Westinghouse Broad. Co., 532 A.2d 346 (Pa. 1987). · cites it 2× “These consolidated appeals present the question of whether the Pennsylvania Shield Law, 42 Pa.C.S. § 5942(a), protects from discovery by a plaintiff in a libel action all unpublished documentary information gathered by a television station.”
Show all 39 citing cases →
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5942(a) — 18 cases
Commonwealth v. Bowden, 838 A.2d 740 (Pa. 2003). “This appeal concerns the scope of the Pennsylvania Shield Law, 42 Pa.C.S. § 5942, the reach of the qualified reporters' privilege to refuse to disclose sources and materials, and the propriety of a contempt sanction imposed on two reporters for refusing to provide prosecutors…”
Hatchard v. Westinghouse Broad. Co., 504 A.2d 211 (Pa. 1986). “3 The motion sought: (1) all tapes, film, transcripts and other documentary material prepared by KYW during its investigation of Hatchard, but “excluding any such material that would reveal the identity of your sources pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. § 5942;” and (2) all tapes, film and…”
Hatchard v. Westinghouse Broad. Co., 532 A.2d 346 (Pa. 1987). “These consolidated appeals present the question of whether the Pennsylvania Shield Law, 42 Pa.C.S. § 5942(a), protects from discovery by a plaintiff in a libel action all unpublished documentary information gathered by a television station.”
Commonwealth v. Tyson, 800 A.2d 327 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2002).
Sprague v. Walter, 543 A.2d 1078 (Pa. 1988). “Section 5942 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa. C.S. § 5942, which throughout this lawsuit has been referred to as the “Shield Law”, provides in pertinent part: Confidential communications to news reporters (a) General rule.”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5942(b) — 3 cases
Commonwealth v. Bowden, 838 A.2d 740 (Pa. 2003). “This appeal concerns the scope of the Pennsylvania Shield Law, 42 Pa.C.S. § 5942, the reach of the qualified reporters' privilege to refuse to disclose sources and materials, and the propriety of a contempt sanction imposed on two reporters for refusing to provide prosecutors…”
Castellani v. Scranton Times, L.P., 956 A.2d 937 (Pa. 2008). “Pennsylvania's Shield Law, 42 Pa.C.S. § 5942, protects a newspaper's source of information from compelled disclosure.”
Sprague v. Walter, 543 A.2d 1078 (Pa. 1988). “Section 5942 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa. C.S. § 5942, which throughout this lawsuit has been referred to as the “Shield Law”, provides in pertinent part: Confidential communications to news reporters (a) General rule.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.