Nonprofit Our Nevada Judges sues over high-profile Rupert Murdoch trust proceedings in Reno, other Nevada cases
The nonprofit Our Nevada Judges (ONJ) is challenging court secrecy practices in Nevada, arguing that they violate constitutional rights to public access to courtrooms. Alex Falconi, ONJ’s founding director, said Tuesday that these practices undermine transparency and the First Amendment right to access to report on court hearings. ONJ filed a petition with the Nevada Supreme Court seeking to unseal records and allow camera access in high-profile cases.
The Washoe County Second Judicial District Court is being sued over the Rupert Murdoch trust case heard in September. The court hearings were held in secret. Probate Commissioner Edmund Gorman recommended denying public and media access to the case, but the order was never formally granted—at least not publicly.
The New York Times, CNN, Associated Press, NPR, Washington Post and Reuters filed on Sept. 4 a motion to intervene and unseal records in a case involving an unidentified family trust.
ONJ intervened in the case, but District Court Judge David Hardy did not rule on ONJ’s participation. The Murdoch trust hearings proceeded as scheduled, but no members of the public or news media were allowed to attend.
“Probate Judge David Hardy’s … ruling is either unknown, does not exist or is lumped into the Media Coalition’s denial of access,” the suit states.
ONJ is also asking the Nevada Supreme Court to order lower courts to open proceedings in cases involving parental rights. Falconi argues that blanket sealing of court files hinders proper oversight of the judiciary. “Court practices continue to breed distrust in the judiciary by operating behind an unnecessary veil of secrecy,” Falconi said.
The petition highlights practices in three Nevada judicial districts, including:
- Automatically sealing entire case files in family court matters
- Denying camera access to high-profile trust proceedings
- Refusing to disclose basic case information, such as hearing dates
“Who has control of Rupert Murdoch’s many companies, his legacy and his $20 billion fortune is a matter of immense public interest,” the lawsuit states of the super sealing of the Murdoch case.
Since the Murdoch case—referred to as the “Trust Case”—remains sealed in Nevada’s Second Judicial District Court, ONJ argues that Gorman and Judge Hardy improperly closed proceedings to the public and denied camera access.
“The categorical sealing practices currently employed by court clerks are unconstitutionally overbroad and violate both the First Amendment and [supreme court rules],” ONJ attorney Luke Busby wrote. Busby added that despite paying an initial appearance fee, ONJ has been unable to access any records in the Trust Case through the court’s electronic filing system. Busby also represents This Is Reno in public records cases.
ONJ is also challenging the sealing of a termination of parental rights case in Clark County’s Eighth Judicial District Court. Falconi said District Court Judge Gregory Gordon erred by refusing to unseal basic case information.
“Termination of parental rights is an exercise of awesome judicial power that is tantamount to imposition of a civil death penalty,” Falconi’s lawsuit states, quoting a previous Nevada Supreme Court ruling.
His petition also raises concerns about delays in media access to court records. It cites an instance where a KTNV reporter in Las Vegas sought court videos related to a Commission on Judicial Discipline ruling against District Court Judge Mary Perry. According to ONJ, even a one-day delay hindered the reporter’s ability to publish timely and accurate coverage.
“ONJ’s Founding Director is aware of multiple instances where delay impacted accuracy of media coverage, the most recent of which involved a KTNV news reporter asking how to obtain [court] videos evidencing the misconduct the Commission on Judicial Discipline cited when imposing discipline against District Court Judge Mary Perry,” the lawsuit alleges. “[Falconi] was informed by the news reporter that even a one-day delay was unacceptable and would not justify a postponement of broadcast nor publication.”
“The First Amendment guarantees that everyone has the right to see what is going on in our courtrooms, and to avoid violating the public’s rights, judges must be very careful and limited about what information is withheld from view.”
ONJ is also arguing that court sealing practices violate constitutional principles.
“Blanket sealing rules serve two purposes: they purportedly protect family privacy, but their most tangible effect is shielding judges and lawyers from public oversight,” the petition states.
The nonprofit is asking the Nevada Supreme Court to require lower courts to open the Murdoch trust case proceedings to the public and prohibit court clerks from sealing entire case files without specific judicial determinations.
ACLU files amicus brief in Murdoch case
The other case in the Nevada Supreme Court, filed by several national news media companies, also seeks to get the Murdoch case unsealed. After numerous news sources were denied court access, the news media took the case to the Nevada Supreme Court, seeking to unseal the court records in the Murdoch case.
The court to date has allowed the defendents—Murdoch and heirs to his fortune and control of Fox News—to file their motions under seal. The parties in the case are still listed as “Doe.” The ACLU of Nevada and the Holland and Hart law firm filed on Oct. 18 an amicus brief in the case. They cited Falconi’s February case in the Nevada Supreme Court that asserted open access to court was the rule.
“The First Amendment guarantees that everyone has the right to see what is going on in our courtrooms, and to avoid violating the public’s rights, judges must be very careful and limited about what information is withheld from view,” the groups said in a statement to the news media. “This rule applies the same to anyone who wants to use our court system—the rich and famous are not entitled to special treatment under the Constitution.”