District of Columbia

Delinquency and dependency proceedings: D.C. law provides for media access to juvenile court proceedings but includes limitations on publication. Specifically, the law allows the judge to admit those having a proper interest in the case or in the work of the juvenile court, and “[a]ny authorized representative of the news media” is among those who “shall be deemed to have a proper interest in the work of the Family Court, and shall be admissible to Family Court proceedings after filling out an application.” Among other things, the applicant is required to state that he or she “will refrain from divulging information identifying the [minor] or members of the [minor’s] family or any other child involved in the proceedings.” D.C. Super. Ct. Juv. R. 53; D.C. Code § 16-2316 (2012). Interpreting this statute and rule, D.C.’s highest appellate court directed that all media be excluded from proceedings involving a juvenile charged in a shooting death, even where the juvenile had already been identified in an article in The Wall Street Journal. The court rejected the media’s argument that “the cat is already out of the bag,” noting that “[a]ssuming that the kitten’s whiskers (or even its tail) may be showing, the rest of the body remains concealed.” It held that the admission of the media at juvenile proceedings was a “discretionary” determination for the trial court. In particular, the court explained: “[I]f there is no reasonable assurance that the admission of the press will be consistent with the protection of a juvenile respondent’s anonymity, then exclusion may be the only alternative which will not compromise the legislature’s paramount aim.” The prior restraint doctrine was not implicated by the statute and rule, the court held, because the restraint was limited to information obtained through the judicial proceeding. “A prior restraint occurs when the state attempts to prohibit the publication of material already in the possession of the media,” the court said. In re J.D.C., 594 A.2d 70, 74 n.6, 75, 79 (D.C. 1991).

Delinquency and dependency records: Juvenile court records are confidential in D.C. and may be inspected only by certain individuals and agencies designated by statute. D.C. Code §§ 16-2331—2332, 16-2363.

Restrictions on coverage: Although there does not appear to be a statute on point, D.C.’s highest appellate court has held that trial judges do not abuse their discretion when they allow young sexual abuse victims to testify outside the presence of the defendant via video-recorded testimony or closed-circuit television. Williams v. United States, 859 A.2d 130, 136—37 (D.C. 2004). Before doing so, however, the court must hear evidence and determine whether the use of out-of-court testimony is necessary to protect the welfare of the child witness who is testifying, find that the child witness would be traumatized, not by testifying in open court generally, but by the presence of the defendant and that the emotional distress the child would suffer in the presence of the defendant is more than minimal. Ahmed v. United States, 856 A.2d 560, 565 (D.C. 2004). It is not clear from the case law whether the media and public may remain in the courtroom during this testimony.