About this series

The American judicial system has, historically, been open to the public, and the U.S. Supreme Court has continually affirmed the presumption of openness. However, as technology expands and as the perceived threat of violence grows, individual courts attempt to keep control over proceedings by limiting the flow of information. Courts are reluctant to allow media access to certain cases or to certain proceedings, like jury selection.

Courts routinely impose gag orders to limit public discussion about pending cases, presuming that there is no better way to ensure a fair trial. Many judges fear that having cameras in courtrooms will somehow interfere with the decorum and solemnity of judicial proceedings. Such steps, purportedly taken to ensure fairness, may actually harm the integrity of a trial because court secrecy and limits on information are contrary to the fundamental constitutional guarantee of a public trial.

The public should be the beneficiary of the judicial system. Criminal proceedings are instituted in the name of “the people” for the benefit of the public. Civil proceedings are available for members of the public to obtain justice, either individually or on behalf of a “class” of persons similarly situated. The public, therefore, should be informed — well informed — about trials of public interest. The media, as the public’s representative, need to be aware of threats to openness in court proceedings, and must be prepared to fight to insure continued access to trials.

In this series, the Reporters Committee takes a look at key aspects of court secrecy and how they affect the newsgathering process. We examine trends toward court secrecy, and what can be done to challenge it.

For the complete series of “Secret Justice” publications, visit www.rcfp.org/readingroom.


Research for this guide was conducted by Reporters Committee legal interns Ellen Biltz, Mike Torralba and Brian Westley. Publication was funded by a grant from the McCormick Foundation.