Comment on Geoffrey R. Stone "We Need a Federal Journalist-Source Privilege NOW" article in Huffington Post 02.21.2007
It would be important in other cases as well. In the Supreme Court case of "California's motion for leave to file a bill of complaint seeking determination of whether Howard Hughes was domiciled in California or Texas at the time of his death is granted." For example, a former domicile and charges against a sitting President, for a hypothetical capital case against him (or her), would protect the source and journalist from the most powerful person in the world, a sitting US President, a protection that would then therefore be guaranteed by the "law of the land".
It might also protect the press and its sources when it asserts, as an example, that one "George W. Bush" was tried and convicted of "practicing medicine without a license" in a drug charge in Texas, when found later that the defendant was six months younger than the current President and similar in name only (?).