Editorial: Ban on cameras in federal courts hurts democracy

For the first time in history, a former president of the United States entered a courtroom Tuesday to face charges of willfully retaining classified government documents and hiding them from investigators who demanded their return.

In the Miami federal courthouse, Donald Trump pleaded not guilty to a 37-count indictment. America needed to see this. But in the age of an instantaneous 24-hour news cycle and real-time social media, the public didn’t see any of it. A monumental historical event went visually unrecorded.

“This historic American moment will largely (if not fully) be invisible to America,” CBS News correspondent Scott MacFarlane tweeted.

Cameras and microphones are barred from federal courthouses. Electronic media coverage of federal criminal proceedings has been prohibited since 1946 (Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure No. 53). Only very limited electronic access is allowed on a case-by-case basis for ceremonial events such as naturalization proceedings.

Courts routinely make audio recordings, but the public won’t be able to hear those, either. That’s a tragedy of epic proportions and bad for democracy.

The chief U.S. district judge for the Southern District of Florida, Cecilia Altonaga, issued an order barring news media members from bringing cell phones into the courthouse, as those can record audio and take pictures.

The archaic news blackout led to a bizarre contradiction on the streets of Miami. An enormous national media presence encamped outside the Wilkie D. Ferguson Jr. Courthouse, which drew enterprising street vendors in the 90-degree heat. But a blanket prohibition on electronic coverage ensured that nothing that happened inside would ever be seen or heard by the public.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant, to paraphrase Justice Louis Brandeis. That’s never more true than with Trump.

Many national and local news organizations, including the Sun Sentinel, Miami Herald, National Public Radio, Telemundo and others, petitioned the Miami court to permit limited pre-hearing video of the Miami courtroom and a nearby hallway outside. (Video of the hearing was provided to an overflow room for viewing only, news reports said.)

“This is a case of exceptional public interest to the entire country and beyond,” argued a media coalition of the major TV networks, The New York Times, Washington Post and others. “The judiciary’s dedication to open and transparent courts takes on added significance in historical proceedings such as this, where the public demands full and complete knowledge of what transpired to understand the government’s decision to exercise its prosecutorial power over Mr. Trump.”

The Justice Department and Trump took no position on the media’s request, and the court’s answer came quickly: No.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman rejected the request, and said “allowing photographs would undermine the massive security arrangements put in place.” He denied a second request by the media outlets to make audio recordings available, despite the fact that many federal courts in the U.S. do so on a regular basis. The immediate availability of audio recordings would provide transparency to counteract inevitable distortion, spin and theatrics.

With the ex-president baselessly attacking the case against him as a witch hunt and accusing President Biden of “weaponizing” the Justice Department against him, it’s more vital than ever that Americans judge for themselves the case against Trump.

To make things worse, Trump’s upcoming trial in Manhattan, on charges of paying hush money to two women, will also be conducted out of public view. That’s because New York is one of the few jurisdictions left in the U.S. that still bars cameras in state courts. It’s an inexcusably backward policy that is also bad for democracy.

If an unobtrusive stationary camera could be used, people would see the impartial American justice system at work. It’s slow and ponderous, and often tangled up in procedural technicalities, but it works. What’s wrong with letting the public see it?

The federal ban on electronic coverage is actually dangerous for democracy. This stubborn and anachronistic unwillingness to let the sunshine in persists at a time of steadily declining confidence in government at all levels, including the judiciary.

Florida is the national leader in allowing electronic media access to courtrooms. At the urging of two stations then owned by Post-Newsweek (WPLG in Miami and WJXT in Jacksonville), the Florida Supreme Court approved an experimental cameras in the courtroom program in 1977. It survived a U.S. Supreme Court challenge and continues to work after four decades.

When the Florida Supreme Court heard arguments in the 2000 presidential recount case, Bush v. Gore, the whole world was watching.

The image of Trump, a former president of the United States, standing before a judge, answering to a long list of felony charges, is not just news. It is history. If there are no pictures of it for future generations to see, it’s a loss for democracy, too.

____

The Sun Sentinel Editorial Board consists of Editorial Page Editor Steve Bousquet, Deputy Editorial Page Editor Dan Sweeney, and Editor-in-Chief Julie Anderson. Editorials are the opinion of the Board and written by one of its members or a designee. To contact us, email at letters@sun-sentinel.com.

___