Essentially all orders, entered in the US courts on the docket -- under over a century of precedent, are presumptively required to be made public -- immediately -- absent a detailed hearing and written findings from the court delineating why any part might not be made publicly available. This is a core tenant of our "freedom of the press" jurisprudence.
But here in late March 2024 (the original was shown in court in early October of 2023), we are again reading of a minute order / potential delay to making the contours of the upcoming schedule. . . public, thus (just entered today):
. . .As discussed at today's telephone status conference, by or before April 3, 2024 the parties shall file a joint letter informing the Court as to whether either party objects to holding in abeyance the May 10, 2024 filing of the proposed final pretrial order until the determination of the forthcoming motions in limine.
So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Michael A. Hammer on 3/28/24. . . .
Obviously, the parties must not want it made public -- but the interest of the free press is always supposed to be considered by able Magistrate Judges, in federal court.
We may need to restate the law for the court, by letter to chambers. Please do make at least a redacted version available, Judge Hammer -- or I will appear and file for one at least redacted version to be compelled, under the Supremes' precedents from the Nixon era -- specifically. . . Nixon v. Warner Communications 435 US 589, 597 (1978).
Hmm. . . okay. Onward.
नमस्ते
No comments:
Post a Comment