Get 40% Off
👀 👁 🧿 All eyes on Biogen, up +4,56% after posting earnings. Our AI picked it in March 2024.
Which stocks will surge next?
Unlock AI-picked Stocks

U.S. Supreme Court spurns bid to keep same-sex marriage trial video sealed

Published 10/11/2022, 09:57 AM
Updated 10/11/2022, 11:21 AM
© Reuters. FILE PHOTO: The U.S. Supreme Court building is seen in Washington, U.S., October 2, 2022. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz/File Photo

By Mike Scarcella

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday turned away a bid by gay-marriage opponents to block the public release of video of a watershed 2010 trial in California that overturned a voter-approved ban on gay nuptials in America's most populous state.

The justices declined to hear the appeal of a lower court's 2021 ruling in favor of news media companies including public radio and TV broadcaster KQED and advocates of gay marriage who sought release of video of the proceedings made for the trial judge. Proponents of the 2008 ballot initiative, called Proposition 8, had argued the video should remain sealed based on the trial judge's pledge at the time to keep it private.

Christopher Dusseault, a lawyer who fought to unseal the video, said the Supreme Court's order cleared the way "for public release of this important historical record."

"While the trial took place more than 12 years ago, the lessons that it teaches about equality and justice could not be more vital today," added Dusseault, of the law firm Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher.

The two-week trial in federal court in San Francisco, presided over by U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, involved a lawsuit brought by two gay couples who challenged Proposition 8 to ban same-sex marriage in California, which passed with the support of 52% of voters.

Walker ruled in 2010 that the state's bar on same-sex marriage violated the U.S. Constitution's guarantees of due process and equal protection under the law.

The Supreme Court in 2013 let Walker's ruling stand, paving a way for same-sex couples to marry in California. The Supreme Court in June 2015 in a landmark ruling of its own legalized gay marriage nationwide, ruling along the same constitutional grounds as Walker.

3rd party Ad. Not an offer or recommendation by Investing.com. See disclosure here or remove ads .

Walker recorded the 2010 trial for what he said would be a tool to help him write his ruling, stating that "it's not going to be for purposes of public broadcasting or televising." The recording has remained sealed since then though a written transcript of the trial long has been available.

The Supreme Court in 2010 rejected a bid to allow the trial to be publicly broadcast, finding that such a step was not allowed under the San Francisco federal court's rules.

San Francisco-based KQED in 2017 asked a federal court to "unseal the tapes and permit them to be viewed by everyone." It said in a legal filing that the tapes are of interest to "court-watchers, law students, scholars, historians, activists, concerned citizens and those interested in the transparent operation of the judicial branch."

A three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in 2021 that the video recording of the trial could be released. Writing for the majority, Circuit Judge William Fletcher said Proposition 8 supporters had failed to show how they would be harmed by its disclosure.

In dissent, Circuit Judge Sandra Ikuta called the court's order "another sad chapter in the story of how the judiciary has been willing to bend or break its own rules."

Charles Cooper, the conservative lawyer who pressed the effort to keep the video sealed, told the Supreme Court in seeking review of the 9th Circuit ruling that "the root question in this case is whether a federal judge's binding promise, made to litigants in open court and on the record, is worthy of trust."

3rd party Ad. Not an offer or recommendation by Investing.com. See disclosure here or remove ads .

In a statement on Tuesday, Cooper called the Supreme Court's order "sad and lamentable," adding that the justices let stand "a decision deliberately reneging on a federal district court judge's solemn and unequivocal promise in open court."

Latest comments

Risk Disclosure: Trading in financial instruments and/or cryptocurrencies involves high risks including the risk of losing some, or all, of your investment amount, and may not be suitable for all investors. Prices of cryptocurrencies are extremely volatile and may be affected by external factors such as financial, regulatory or political events. Trading on margin increases the financial risks.
Before deciding to trade in financial instrument or cryptocurrencies you should be fully informed of the risks and costs associated with trading the financial markets, carefully consider your investment objectives, level of experience, and risk appetite, and seek professional advice where needed.
Fusion Media would like to remind you that the data contained in this website is not necessarily real-time nor accurate. The data and prices on the website are not necessarily provided by any market or exchange, but may be provided by market makers, and so prices may not be accurate and may differ from the actual price at any given market, meaning prices are indicative and not appropriate for trading purposes. Fusion Media and any provider of the data contained in this website will not accept liability for any loss or damage as a result of your trading, or your reliance on the information contained within this website.
It is prohibited to use, store, reproduce, display, modify, transmit or distribute the data contained in this website without the explicit prior written permission of Fusion Media and/or the data provider. All intellectual property rights are reserved by the providers and/or the exchange providing the data contained in this website.
Fusion Media may be compensated by the advertisers that appear on the website, based on your interaction with the advertisements or advertisers.
© 2007-2024 - Fusion Media Limited. All Rights Reserved.