I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2155

To allow media coverage of court proceedings. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 20, 2003

Mr. CHABOT (for himself and Mr. DELAHUNT) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL

To allow media coverage of court proceedings.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. FINDINGS. 

4 The Congress makes the following findings: 

5 (1) The right of the people of the United States 

6 to freedom of speech, particularly as it relates to 

7 comment on governmental activities, as protected by 

8 the first amendment to the Constitution, cannot be 

9 meaningfully exercised without the ability of the 

10 public to obtain facts and information about the 

11 Government upon which to base their judgments re12 garding important issues and events. As the United 
2

•HR 2155 IH 

1 States Supreme Court articulated in Craig v. Har2 ney (1947), ‘‘A trial is a public event. What tran3 spires in the court room is public property.’’. 

4 (2) The right of the people of the United States 

5 to a free press, with the ability to report on all as6 pects of the conduct of the business of government, 

7 as protected by the first amendment to the Constitu8 tion, cannot be meaningfully exercised without the 

9 ability of the news media to gather facts and infor10 mation freely for dissemination to the public. 

11 (3) The right of the people of the United States 

12 to petition the Government to redress grievances, 

13 particularly as it relates to the manner in which the 

14 Government exercises its legislative, executive, and 

15 judicial powers, as protected by the first amendment 

16 to the Constitution, cannot be meaningfully exer17 cised without the availability to the public of infor18 mation about how the affairs of government are 

19 being conducted. As the Supreme Court noted in 

20 Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Commonwealth of 

21 Virginia (1980), ‘‘People in an open society do not 

22 demand infallibility from their institutions, but it is 

23 difficult for them to accept what they are prohibited 

24 from observing.’’
3

•HR 2155 IH 

1 (4) In the twenty-first century, the people of 

2 the United States obtain information regarding judi3 cial matters involving the Constitution, civil rights, 

4 and other important legal subjects principally 

5 through the print and electronic media. Television, 

6 in particular, provides a degree of public access to 

7 courtroom proceedings that more closely approxi8 mates the ideal of actual physical presence than 

9 newspaper coverage or still photography. 

10 (5) Providing statutory authority for the courts 

11 of the United States to exercise their discretion in 

12 permitting televised coverage of courtroom pro13 ceedings would enhance significantly the access of 

14 the people to the Federal judiciary. 

15 (6) Inasmuch as the first amendment to the 

16 Constitution prevents Congress from abridging the 

17 ability of the people to exercise their inherent rights 

18 to freedom of speech, to freedom of the press, and 

19 to petition the Government for a redress of griev20 ances, it is good public policy for the Congress af21 firmatively to facilitate the ability of the people to 

22 exercise those rights. 

23 (7) The granting of such authority would assist 

24 in the implementation of the constitutional guar25 antee of public trials in criminal cases, as provided 
4

•HR 2155 IH 

1 by the sixth amendment to the Constitution. As the 

2 Supreme Court stated in In re Oliver (1948), 

3 ‘‘Whatever other benefits the guarantee to an ac4 cused that his trial be conducted in public may con5 fer upon our society, the guarantee has always been 

6 recognized as a safeguard against any attempt to 

7 employ our courts as instruments of persecution. 

8 The knowledge that every criminal trial is subject to 

9 contemporaneous review in the forum of public opin10 ion is an effective restraint on possible abuse of judi11 cial power.’’. 

12 SEC. 2. AUTHORITY OF PRESIDING JUDGE TO ALLOW 

13 MEDIA COVERAGE OF COURT PROCEEDINGS. 

14 (a) AUTHORITY OF APPELLATE COURTS.—Notwith15 standing any other provision of law, the presiding judge 

16 of an appellate court of the United States may, in his or 

17 her discretion, permit the photographing, electronic re18 cording, broadcasting, or televising to the public of court 

19 proceedings over which that judge presides. 

20 (b) AUTHORITY OF DISTRICT COURTS.—

21 (1) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other 

22 provision of law, any presiding judge of a district 

23 court of the United States may, in his or her discre24 tion, permit the photographing, electronic recording, 
5

•HR 2155 IH 

1 broadcasting, or televising to the public of court pro2 ceedings over which that judge presides. 

3 (2) OBSCURING OF WITNESSES.—(A) Upon the 

4 request of any witness in a trial proceeding other 

5 than a party, the court shall order the face and voice 

6 of the witness to be disguised or otherwise obscured 

7 in such manner as to render the witness unrecogniz8 able to the broadcast audience of the trial pro9 ceeding. 

10 (B) The presiding judge in a trial proceeding 

11 shall inform each witness who is not a party that the 

12 witness has the right to request that his or her 

13 image and voice be obscured during the witness’ tes14 timony. 

15 (c) ADVISORY GUIDELINES.—The Judicial Con16 ference of the United States is authorized to promulgate 

17 advisory guidelines to which a presiding judge, in his or 

18 her discretion, may refer in making decisions with respect 

19 to the management and administration of photographing, 

20 recording, broadcasting, or televising described in sub21 sections (a) and (b). 

22 SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS. 

23 In this Act: 

24 (1) PRESIDING JUDGE.—The term ‘‘presiding 

25 judge’’ means the judge presiding over the court 
6

•HR 2155 IH 

1 proceeding concerned. In proceedings in which more 

2 than one judge participates, the presiding judge 

3 shall be the senior active judge so participating or, 

4 in the case of a circuit court of appeals, the senior 

5 active circuit judge so participating, except that—

6 (A) in en banc sittings of any United 

7 States circuit court of appeals, the presiding 

8 judge shall be the chief judge of the circuit 

9 whenever the chief judge participates; and 

10 (B) in en banc sittings of the Supreme 

11 Court of the United States, the presiding judge 

12 shall be the Chief Justice whenever the Chief 

13 Justice participates. 

14 (2) APPELLATE COURT OF THE UNITED

15 STATES.—The term ‘‘appellate court of the United 

16 States’’ means any United States circuit court of ap17 peals and the Supreme Court of the United States. 

18 SEC. 4. SUNSET. 

19 The authority under section 2(b) shall terminate on 

20 the date that is 3 years after the date of the enactment 

21 of this Act.

Æ