Court TV challenges law banning cameras in N.Y. trial courts
By The Associated Press
09.06.01
Printer-friendly page
NEW YORK — The Court TV network filed a lawsuit yesterday alleging New York state's ban on cameras in trial courtrooms is unconstitutional.
The lawsuit seeks to strike down a 1952 law that prevents the media from using cameras in most New York courtrooms.
All 50 states allow cameras to record appeals court proceedings, but 10 states ban them at the trial level. The 40 other states generally allow cameras at the trial level but usually at the discretion of the judge.
Court TV representatives say that under the First Amendment, broadcasters, as members of the press, have a guaranteed right to be in the courtroom.
Network representatives also note that several New York state trial judges have allowed cameras after ruling that the ban is unconstitutional. A judge last year allowed television coverage of the trial of four New York City police officers acquitted in the death of African immigrant Amadou Diallo.
"New York is considered by many to be one of the premier legal centers in the nation, and the cases that are heard in its courts are among the most interesting and important," Court TV Chairman Henry Schleiff said in a statement.
Schleiff argued New Yorkers would gain "a more comprehensive understanding and knowledge of their judicial system" if the law banning cameras was declared unconstitutional.
The lawsuit names Gov. George Pataki, state Attorney General Eliot Spitzer and Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau.
"We'll have to review the particulars of the lawsuit," Pataki spokesman Joseph Conway said. "Governor Pataki has been a long-standing supporter of cameras in the courtroom, along with appropriate provisions to protect the rights of crime victims."
The attorney general "does not believe it's desirable public policy to ban cameras in the courtrooms," said Spitzer spokesman Darren Dopp. "But we believe the current law is defensible. It's a policy choice by the legislature he is bound to defend."
Morgenthau spokeswoman Barbara Thompson said the office had not seen the lawsuit but supported allowing cameras in the courtroom.
David Boies, Court TV's attorney, said he hoped that if the New York lawsuit was successful the other nine states that ban cameras in trials would change their laws. They are Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, and Utah.
Related
N.Y. high court won't hear cameras-in-court case
But judges say their refusal should not be interpreted as passing judgment on legality of camera-ban law.
07.07.00
N.Y. court agrees to televise judge's bribery trial
Case will mark first time TV cameras have been allowed in New York City courtrooms in five years.
02.12.02
Cameras make Diallo shooting trial a fully public event
NEW YORK — The Bronx street where Amadou Diallo died in a barrage of police gunfire is 140 miles from the Albany court where four cops are charged with his murder, but a television camera in the courtroom helps Diallo's old neighbors and others bear witness to the trial. In conversations on Feb. 15 at the site of the killing, they said that was important.
02.18.00
Panelists split over benefits, dangers of cameras in courtroom
If ever there was a court case that belonged on television, the Amadou Diallo trial in Albany, N.Y., was that case, Fred Graham, chief anchor and managing editor of Court TV, said during a discussion Tuesday at Newseum/NY of placing still and TV cameras in courtrooms.
04.12.00
N.Y. governor proposes measure to restore courtroom cameras
'As demonstrated by the recent Diallo trial, appropriate, televised coverage of courtroom proceedings provides undeniable benefits to the people of our state,' says George Pataki.
03.17.00
Diallo trial spurs promise for legislation to restore courtroom cameras
But opponents voice same objections that prompted New York lawmakers to end televised criminal trials three years ago.
02.28.00
