Press coalition to courts: Don’t walk back pandemic-era access

CTK/Josef Horazny via AP
Our court system should be open to the public and not operate behind closed doors.
The First Amendment gives the public and the press the right to attend trials, access court documents, and report on the justice system. But far too often, judges try to evade that right by sealing records or holding secret proceedings.
We must fight back against attempts to make the court system less transparent and push to expand access. Reporting on the courts helps make our justice system fairer and guards against miscarriages of justice.
A recent federal appeals court ruling may be a big win for data journalists and researchers who depend on scraping to collect information to report on.
Recent courtroom wins in California have led to the release of new police shooting records under a new transparency law, but some government agencies have been resisting compliance.
A lawsuit by a logging company against environmental groups is a prime example of how corporations bring lawsuits in an attempt to drain their critics of resources and intimidate them into silence.
In a decision that could have dangerous reverberations for press freedom, a federal district judge ruled last week that Esquire violated a copyright held by a Deutsche Bank vice president when it published his photo of Donald Trump crashing a stranger’s wedding at his New Jersey club.
After the White House unilaterally revoked CNN White House correspondent Jim Acosta's press pass last week, a federal judge has temporarily ordered the White House to reinstate it immediately.
Many civil liberties violations and instances of state abuse that incarcerated people experience are rendered invisible from the rest of the country. Prisons are cracking down on incarcerated people’s rights to access information, learn, and read the news—a huge threat to the First and Fourth Amendments.
Law enforcement can no longer claim people have no right to privacy when using a cell phone, and must obtain a warrant to collect historical location data, the Supreme Court ruled today in the long-awaited Carpenter v. United States. This ruling marks a victory for the First and Fourth Amendments, and for journalism.
An ICE attorney twice objected to the presence of a reporter at a deportation hearing earlier this month. This isn’t the first time ICE has interfered with journalists doing their jobs.
There are many side effects to being stonewalled: disbelief, anger, disillusionment, and, of course, repeating yourself. I have experienced them all. Since early 2012, I’ve been trying to access evidence from one of the most significant prescription drug-dealing trials in U.S. history, which ended with Dr. Paul Volkman – who …
The First Amendment provides the press some of the greatest protections in the world against liability from powerful forces attempting to use libel law to silence critics. Unfortunately, that won’t stop many wealthy individuals and corporations from trying to sue smaller news organizations and bloggers—even knowing they will lose the …