Editorial: Ban on cameras in federal courts hurts democracy

On Tuesday, for the first time in history, a former president of the United States entered a courtroom to face charges of willfully retaining classified government documents and hiding them from investigators who demanded their return.

In the Miami federal courthouse, Donald Trump pleaded not guilty to a 37-count indictment. America needed to see this. But in the age of an instantaneous 24-hour news cycle and real-time social media, the public didn’t see any of it. A monumental historical event went visually unrecorded.

Cameras and microphones are barred from federal courthouses. Electronic media coverage of federal criminal proceedings has been prohibited since 1946. Only very limited electronic access is allowed on a case-by-case basis for ceremonial events such as naturalization proceedings.

Courts routinely make audio recordings, but the public won’t be able to hear those, either. That’s a tragedy of epic proportions and bad for democracy.

The chief U.S. district judge for the Southern District of Florida, Cecilia Altonaga, issued an order barring news media members from bringing cell phones into the courthouse, as those can record audio and take pictures.

The archaic news blackout led to a bizarre contradiction on the streets of Miami. An enormous national media presence encamped outside. But a blanket prohibition on electronic coverage ensured that nothing that happened inside would ever be seen or heard by the public.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant, to paraphrase Justice Louis Brandeis. That’s never more true than with Trump.

Many national and local news organizations petitioned the Miami court to permit limited pre-hearing video of the Miami courtroom and a nearby hallway outside.

“This is a case of exceptional public interest to the entire country and beyond,” argued a media coalition of the major TV networks, The New York Times, Washington Post and others. “The judiciary’s dedication to open and transparent courts takes on added significance in historical proceedings such as this, where the public demands full and complete knowledge of what transpired to understand the government’s decision to exercise its prosecutorial power over Mr. Trump.”

The court’s answer came quickly: No.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman rejected the request, and said “allowing photographs would undermine the massive security arrangements put in place.” He denied a second request by the media outlets to make audio recordings available. The immediate availability of audio recordings would provide transparency to counteract inevitable distortion, spin and theatrics.

With the ex-president baselessly attacking the case against him as a witch hunt and accusing President Joe Biden of “weaponizing” the Justice Department against him, it’s more vital than ever that Americans judge for themselves.

Trump’s upcoming trial in Manhattan, on charges of paying hush money to two women, will also be conducted out of public view. New York is one of the few jurisdictions left in the U.S. that still bars cameras. It’s an inexcusably backward policy that is also bad for democracy.

An unobtrusive stationary camera would show people the impartial justice system at work. It’s slow and ponderous, and often tangled up in procedural technicalities, but it works.

This stubborn and anachronistic unwillingness to let the sunshine in persists at a time of steadily declining confidence in government at all levels.

Florida is the national leader in allowing electronic media access to courtrooms. The Florida Supreme Court approved experimental cameras in 1977. It survived a U.S. Supreme Court challenge and continues to work after four decades. When it heard arguments in the 2000 presidential recount case, Bush v. Gore, the whole world was watching.

The image of Trump, a former president of the United States, standing before a judge, answering to a long list of felony charges, is not just news. It is history. If there are no pictures of it for future generations to see, it’s a loss for democracy, too.

Written by the South Florida Sun Sentinel editorial board.