Illinois

Institute for Justice v. Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation

December 6, 2017

The Reporters Committee filed an amicus brief in the Illinois Supreme Court in a state Freedom of Information Act case concerning the retroactive application of a new exemption enacted during the pendency of the case. The brief argues that (1) a rule permitting the retroactive application of new FOIA exemptions would undermine the well-established public policy of Illinois in favor of transparency, and (2) given the important interests at stake the Court should adopt a clear-statement rule for all amendments to FOIA.

Illinois v. Van Dyke (Jamie Kalven)

December 5, 2017

The Reporters Committee and 18 other media organizations filed an amicus brief in support of reporter Jamie Kalven, who was subpoenaed to testify in Illinois v. Van Dyke. Van Dyke is the Chicago police officer on trial for murder in the death of Laquan McDonald, an African American teenager. Kalven's reporting revealed facts about the shooting that contradicted the official police account and ultimately led to the release of a police video of the incident and Van Dyke's prosecution. The brief emphasizes the importance of the reporter's privilege and argues that Kalven is protected by the Illinois Reporter's Privilege Act.

E. Webcasting

Overview

Illinois

D. Still cameras

Overview

Illinois

A. Authorization

Overview

Illinois

XI. Cameras and other technology in the courtroom

Overview

Illinois

In Illinois, courts have allowed cameras in the courtroom with greater frequency since 2012.  In a court order entered January, 2012, the Illinois Supreme Court authorized the trial courts of Illinois (known as circuit courts) to allow extended media coverage in courtrooms on an experimental, circuit-by-circuit basis.  See Administrative Order for Extended Media Coverage in the Circuit Courts of Illinois on an Experimental Basis, M.R. 2634 (2012).  Under the order the definition of ‘extended media coverage’ is “any media recording or broadcasting of proceedings by the use of television, radio, photographic, or recording equipment for the purpose of gathering and disseminating news to the public.” Id., Sec. 1.1.  The Illinois Supreme Court has allowed media coverage of proceedings in the Supreme Court and in appellate courts under certain conditions. See Ill. Sup. Ct. R. 63 cmt. ¶ A(8).

A. Media standing to challenge third-party gag orders

Overview

Illinois

It is an open issue as to whether the press has standing to challenge protective “gag” orders prohibiting trial participants from speaking to the media, but not directly gagging the press, although there are cases suggesting that media should have the right because a gag on participants acts as an indirect restraint on the press. See, e.g., People v. Kelly, 397 Ill. App. 3d 232, 265-66, 921 N.E.2d 333, 363, 336 Ill.Dec.719, 749 (Ill. App. Ct. 1st Dist. 2009) (noting that argument against standing was waived and citing In re J.S., 267 Ill. App. 3d 145, 640 N.E.2d 1379, 204 Ill. Dec. 30 (Ill. App. Ct. 2nd Dist. 1994) for the proposition that a gag order on participants “constitutes an indirect restraint on the press.”)