Advertisement

SKIP ADVERTISEMENT

Ruling Blocks Broadcasting of a Trial on Same-Sex Marriage

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Wednesday effectively eliminated the possibility that any part of the trial of a constitutional challenge to a ban on same-sex marriage now under way in San Francisco would be broadcast before it concludes.

Saying lower-court judges in California had acted with unseemly and probably unlawful haste in pushing through new rules to allow broadcasting, the court extended a temporary stay issued Monday until it considers whether to hear an appeal of the issue based on papers yet to be filed. The court instructed the parties to act promptly, but the process will almost certainly take longer than the trial.

The vote in the case was 5 to 4 and divided along ideological lines, with the court’s four more liberal justices in dissent.

The 17-page majority opinion, which was unsigned, focused mainly on what it said were irregularities in how the trial judge, Vaughn R. Walker of the Federal District Court in San Francisco, and Chief Judge Alex Kozinski of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, changed the applicable rules to allow broadcast coverage.

The main flaw, the opinion said, was that Judge Walker allowed only five business days for public comment on the proposed changes.

“Courts enforce the requirement of procedural regularity on others,” the opinion said, “and must follow those requirements themselves.”

Justice Stephen G. Breyer, writing for himself and Justices John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor, said Judge Walker had invited comments from the parties to the case in September and had received 138,574 public comments as well, with all but 32 favoring transmission of the proceedings.

“How much more ‘opportunity for comment’ does the court believe necessary?” Justice Breyer asked his colleagues in the majority.

Justice Breyer added that micromanaging trial court procedures was not a wise use of the Supreme Court’s docket and that “the public interest weighs in favor of providing access to the courts.”

The majority opinion did not directly address the possibility of delayed broadcast of the trial by video posted on YouTube or the trial court’s own Web site, apparently because Chief Judge Kozinski never approved Judge Walker’s proposals concerning them. But it did block broadcasts to courthouses around the country, and its reasoning would apply to Internet broadcasts as well.

The opinion said it expressed no views about the wisdom of cameras in the courtroom, but it contained hints of disapproval. The opinion also recited a number of ways in which opponents of same-sex marriage might be subject to harassment should their testimony be broadcast.

Chief Judge Kozinski, in a letter to court administrators on Sunday, defended the new rules as the product of careful deliberations and as warranted by the public interest.

“Like it or not,” he wrote, “we are now well into the 21st century, and it is up to those of us who lead the federal judiciary to adopt policies that are consistent with the spirit of the times and the advantages afforded us by new technology. If we do not, Congress will do it for us.”

A version of this article appears in print on  , Section A, Page 24 of the New York edition with the headline: Ruling Blocks Broadcasting Of a Trial On Marriage. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe

Advertisement

SKIP ADVERTISEMENT