Cameras in the Courtrooms

Statement from Steven Brill
Statement from Court TV Founder & CEO Steven Brill regarding the Judicial Conference's ruling on television coverage of Federal Appeals Courts.

Cameras Roll Into U.S. District Court
Court TV won permission to broadcast oral arguments in a class action brought against Victoria's Secret Catalogue for discriminatory pricing practices based on gender. Here is the April 29, 1996 ruling.

Cameras Roll Into U.S. District Court
A Federal judge in the U.S. District Court in the Southern District of New York ruled that Court TV may televise oral arguments on March 4, 1996 in the federal civil trial of Marisol v. Giuliani. The ruling by Judge Robert J. Ward marks the first time that cameras have been allowed in a federal civil court since the United States Judicial Conference ended its experiment with televising federal trials in 1994. The ruling confirms that each federal district in the country is empowered to make its own rules about camera coverage of federal civil cases.

Court TV to Televise Federal Case
In this Feb. 23, 1996 legal memo, Court TV asks a U.S. District Court in New York for permission to televise Marisol A. v. Giuliani, a civil class action on behalf of the clients of NYC's Child Welfare Administration. The parties in the case did not oppose the network's motion and Judge Robert J. Ward ruled that March 4, 1996 oral arguments could be televised.

TV Camera Banned from Salvi Abortion Clinic Bombing Case
In this February 1, 1996 memorandum of decision, Justice Herbert Wilkins denied courtroom camera coverage in the John Salvi abortion bombing case. Justice Wilkins said that TV camera coverage should be allowed unless there is a specific, special reason not to allow it. He gave two reasons why the camera should be banned in this case:

1. The threat of harm feared by abortion clinic employee-witnesses and families of the deceased victims if their faces were shown on television; and
2. Salvi's outbursts in court when the camera was present.

Court TV to Televise Federal Trial
In this Feb. 23, 1996 legal memo, Court TV asks a U.S. District Court in New York for permission to televise Marisol A. v. Giuliani, a civil class action on behalf of the clients of NYC's Child Welfare Administration. The parties in the case did not oppose the network's motion and Judge Robert J. Ward ruled that March 4, 1996 oral arguments could be televised.

Speech by Steven Brill to the San Diego Inns of Court
In this January 17, 1996 speech to the San Diego Inns of Court, Court TV Founder Steven Brill argues that the founding fathers' intentions when they made trials public support the idea of cameras in the courtroom.

Cameras in Courts
A memo prepared by journalists at Court TV to help clarify the facts on cameras in the courtroom. The memo, "Facts and Opinions About Cameras in Courtrooms," was sent recently to leaders in the legal, government and media arenas. In addition to empirical evidence regarding the effects of cameras in the courtroom, the memo also provides important background information on the history of cameras in our courts.

Brill's Address to the ACLU
In a wide-ranging address to the Southern California Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Steven Brill, founder and CEO of Courtroom Television Network (Court TV), discussed cameras in the courtroom, the trial of CA v. Simpson, journalistic responsibility, the ACLU's position on a defense veto, and E! Entertainment Television's decision to cover the Simpson trial.