This ruling appears to be the first federal court decision to recognize a First Amendment right to record judicial proceedings in any circumstance.
Was there appropriate access to jury selection? Why was full television coverage authorized? Was it justified to ban the Daily Mail from the courtroom for running a prohibited tape? Is the 2-person press pool adequate and reasonable? What other issues are there in running and covering a high-visibility trial during the pandemic?
Katie Townsend, RCFP, and David McCraw and Dana Green, New York Times, discuss newsgathering issues: how access was affected by the crisis, as well as privacy and ethical issues in reporting on COVID-related subjects.
Second Circuit Strikes Down Connecticut Law Sealing Judicial Records in Juvenile Felony Cases Transferred to Adult Criminal CourtShannon Jankowski and Madeline Lamo
The Hartford Courant argued that the law effectively required secret trials for teenagers accused of murder, rape, and other serious crimes, and seriously impeded its ability to inform readers about court proceedings.
Finding that an overflow room is no substitute for in-person attendance, the judge overseeing the prosecutions of the four men charged in the death of George Floyd recently ordered that “[a]udio and video recording, broadcasting and streaming will be allowed” of the trial.