A federal judge in Virginia expressed serious concerns about the US government's actions in a raid on Washington Post reporter Hannah Natanson’s home. The judge, William B. Porter, declined to immediately order the return of devices seized in January, including two laptops, a phone, and a Garmin watch, citing the significant harm caused to Natanson’s journalism and personal life. The case highlights issues of press freedom and legal protections under the Privacy Protection Act of 1980, which aims to restrict government searches of journalists unless they are subjects of investigation. The government argued that the seized materials were necessary for an investigation into a government contractor accused of possessing classified information, but the judge questioned the legality of the search, especially given the government’s failure to inform him about the law protecting journalists. The judge criticized the Justice Department for not disclosing the law, which he believed was applicable, and expressed frustration over the process. He scheduled a follow-up hearing for March 4 to decide whether the devices should be returned or reviewed through a court-ordered process involving a neutral filter team. The case has raised alarms among press freedom advocates, emphasizing the importance of protecting journalists from unwarranted government searches.