> Isn't that something that ultimately the courts will have to decide?

Why would they need to decide that?

Are there laws which only apply to journalists, or don't apply to journalists?

All those links seem on first look to say ‘they need to follow all laws like anyone else would’. Was there something specific?

I think people think there’s some kind of special legal status of being a journalist, like a police officer or something. I’m not sure that’s the case.

The gov't can arrest you any time they want for any reason they'd like. Courts ultimately decide whether or not it was lawful. To answer your question. also...

"Under the First Amendment, laws "abridging the freedom...of the press" are invalid. Most states also have their own laws in place which protect reporters from having to disclose their sources and, in certain cases, unpublished materials. Some states have even included "free press" provisions in their state constitutions." ~ https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/can-a-journalist-be-force....

You can try and call yourself a journalist but you will need a court to uphold it.

You are free to believe whatever youd like but I choose to live in reality... Assange is no journalist.

“As the Supreme Court has accurately warned, a First Amendment distinction between the institutional press and other speakers is unworkable” -- Ninth Circuit, deciding that a blogger count as "press", in Obsidian v. Cox.

Your link doesn't in any way support the distinction you're making, because the issue is who counts as "press", not whether the press has some rights.

So no.