free press, fair trial: when constitutional rights come into conflict
DESCRIPTION
To accompany lecture on Sheppard v. Maxwell, Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart, and related cases on the clash between First and Sixth Amendment rights.TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Free press, fair trial
When constitutional rightscome into conflict
![Page 2: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
First Amendment• “Congress shall make no law … abridging
the freedom of speech, or of the press …”
![Page 3: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
First Amendment• “Congress shall make no law … abridging
the freedom of speech, or of the press …”
Sixth Amendment• “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused
shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury …”
![Page 4: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Questions
• Is the First Amendment more important than the Sixth?
![Page 5: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Questions
• Is the First Amendment more important than the Sixth?
• Is the Sixth Amendment more important than the First?
![Page 6: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Questions
• Is the First Amendment more important than the Sixth?
• Is the Sixth Amendment more important than the First?
• How might these rights come into conflict?
![Page 7: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Prior restraint
• Unconstitutional in nearly all cases– The Near v. Minnesota exceptions:
• National security• Obscenity• Incitement to violence, or “fighting words”
![Page 8: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Prior restraint
• Unconstitutional in nearly all cases• But denying someone a fair trial is also
unconstitutional
![Page 9: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Prior restraint
• Unconstitutional in nearly all cases• But denying someone a fair trial is also
unconstitutional• When interests collide, courts muddle
through on a case-by-case basis
![Page 10: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
“Lindbergh baby” case
• Lindbergh a national hero
• Hauptmann convicted after massive pretrial publicity
• Death penalty eliminated for kidnapping
![Page 11: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Bruno Richard Hauptmann
![Page 12: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Sam Sheppard case
• Illustrated the harm of pretrial publicity
• Led to a backlash against the media
• InspiredThe Fugitive
![Page 13: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
The Sheppards
![Page 14: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
The crime scene
![Page 15: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Public inquest
![Page 16: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Sheppard found guilty
• Judge Blythin (right) up for re-election
• Press allowed the run of the courtroom
• Sheppard sentenced to life in prison
![Page 17: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Sheppard’s appeals
• Turned down by Ohio Court of Appeals and Ohio Supreme Court (1954 and ’55)
• U.S. Supreme Court denies cert (1955)• Released on a writ of habeas corpus (1964)• Conviction overturned by U.S. Supreme Court
(Sheppard v. Maxwell, 1966)• Acquitted in second trial (1966)
![Page 18: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Sheppard’s sad end
• Became a professional wrestler
• Died in 1970• Who was the real
killer?
![Page 19: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Backlash against media• Earl Warren (left) writes
that Oswald could not have received a fair trial
• Gag orders and other restrictions on the media become increasingly common
• Where is the balance of interests?
![Page 20: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Nebraska Press Associationv. Stuart (1976)
• The Burger Court limits the use of gag orders
• For all practical purposes, gag orders are ruled unconstitutional
![Page 21: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Conditions for gag orders
• Pre-trial publicity would be extensive and pervasive
![Page 22: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Conditions for gag orders
• Pre-trial publicity would be extensive and pervasive
• No alternative measures would offset the effects of the publicity
![Page 23: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Conditions for gag orders
• Pre-trial publicity would be extensive and pervasive
• No alternative measures would offset the effects of the publicity
• A gag order would succeed in protecting the right to a fair trial
![Page 24: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Alternative measures
• What are they?
![Page 25: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Alternative measures
• Continuance– Postpone trial until media frenzy blows over
![Page 26: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Alternative measures
• Continuance• Change of venue
– Move trial to a place where the crime is not so notorious
![Page 27: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Alternative measures
• Continuance• Change of venue• Intensive voir dire
– Question prospective jurors as to whether they can remain fair and impartial
![Page 28: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Alternative measures
• Continuance• Change of venue• Intensive voir dire• Jury admonitions
– Remind jurors not to follow coverage in the media or to discuss the case
![Page 29: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Alternative measures
• Continuance• Change of venue• Intensive voir dire• Jury admonitions• Sequestration
– Most extreme, generally (and rarely) used only for deliberations
![Page 30: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
The People v. Bryant (2004)
• Alleged victim’s sexual history is accidentally released to the media
![Page 31: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
The People v. Bryant (2004)
• Alleged victim’s sexual history is accidentally released to the media
• Justice Hobbs: Media should be forbidden to use it under Colorado’s rape shield law
![Page 32: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
The People v. Bryant (2004)
• Alleged victim’s sexual history is accidentally released to the media
• Justice Hobbs: Media should be forbidden to use it under Colorado’s rape shield law
• Justice Bender: That violates the First Amendment
![Page 33: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
The People v. Bryant (2004)
• Alleged victim’s sexual history is accidentally released to the media
• Justice Hobbs: Media should be forbidden to use it under Colorado’s rape shield law
• Justice Bender: That violates the First Amendment
• What do you think?
![Page 34: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Press-Enterprise II (1986)
• Press Enterprise I was about jury selection
![Page 35: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Press-Enterprise II (1986)
• Press Enterprise I was about jury selection• This case is about pre-trial hearings• Burger writes for the majority
– If it looks like a trial, then it should be treated like a trial and be open to the public
![Page 36: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Press-Enterprise II (1986)
• Press Enterprise I was about jury selection• This case is about pre-trial hearings• Burger writes for the majority
– If it looks like a trial, then it should be treated like a trial and be open to the public
– Grand-jury proceedings would be secret because secrecy is their very purpose
![Page 37: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Chandler v. Florida (1981)
• Nothing inherently unconstitutional about the presence of television cameras in court
![Page 38: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Chandler v. Florida (1981)
• Nothing inherently unconstitutional about the presence of television cameras in court
• Television journalists do not have a right to be in the courtroom
![Page 39: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Chandler v. Florida (1981)
• Nothing inherently unconstitutional about the presence of television cameras in court
• Television journalists do not have a right to be in the courtroom
• Same situation as today
![Page 40: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Chandler v. Florida (1981)
• Nothing inherently unconstitutional about the presence of television cameras in court
• Television journalists do not have a right to be in the courtroom
• Same situation as today• What do you think?
![Page 41: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Other cases in brief
• Richmond Newspapers Inc. v. Virginia (1980)– Murder trial closed after first three ended in
mistrial– Justice Burger: Right to attend criminal trials
“implicit” in the First Amendment– Trial can be closed only if there is a specific
finding that it is necessary
![Page 42: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Other cases in brief
• Richmond Newspapers Inc. v. Virginia (1980)
• Press-Enterprise I (1984)– Jury selection must be open to public in most
cases– Exceptions
• “Substantial probability” that defendant’s right to a fair trial would be harmed
• No reasonable alternative
![Page 43: Free Press, Fair Trial: When Constitutional Rights Come into Conflict](https://reader033.vdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022060115/557c8fd8d8b42a6c788b4ba4/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Other cases in brief
• Richmond Newspapers Inc. v. Virginia (1980)
• Press-Enterprise I (1984)• California First Amendment Coalition v.
Woodford (2002)– All parts of an execution must be visible to the
media, not just parts of it– Attempts to close parts an “exaggerated
response” to security concerns