Press-Enterprise Co. v. Superior Court of Cal., Riverside Cty.

Background

A newspaper asked to attend the jury selection (voir dire) in a criminal capital trial where a man was accused of rape and murder. The trial judge closed nearly six weeks of voir dire and denied release of the transcript, and California courts refused the newspaper’s requests. The Supreme Court agreed to review those orders.

Reasoning

The central question was whether jury selection should be open to the public and press. The Court found that juror selection has historically been a public process and that the public’s right of access is protected by First Amendment values. The Court held the process is presumptively open and that a courtroom may be closed only for a compelling, narrowly tailored reason. Judges must make specific findings, consider alternatives, and explain why privacy or fairness cannot be protected by less drastic means. The Court reversed the denial of access and remanded for proceedings consistent with these rules.

Real world impact

After this ruling, newspapers and the public gain stronger access to jury selection, and trial courts must justify any closure with detailed findings. Courts may still protect genuinely sensitive juror information by limited redactions, sealing only necessary parts of transcripts, or allowing private, on-the-record in‑camera requests to the judge.

Dissents or concurrances

Several Justices agreed on the outcome but added views: one stressed practical concerns about recognizing a separate juror “privacy right”; another emphasized the First Amendment basis; another urged redaction and warned against criticizing lengthy voir dire without full facts.