Judges Should Retain TV Option : They, not Sacramento, should decide camera-in-court issues

Judges statewide have denied almost all media requests to cover trials with cameras since the O.J. Simpson verdict, and many judges personally support a total ban on cameras in the courtroom. Nonetheless, the California Judges Assn., which represents the state’s jurists, voted Saturday to reject calls for a blanket ban. That move was wise.

Under existing rules, first adopted by the California Judicial Council in 1984, judges have the power to permit or exclude cameras in the courtroom. Judges can “refuse, limit or terminate film or electronic media coverage in the interests of justice, to protect the rights of parties and the dignity of the court, or to ensure the orderly conduct of the proceedings.” Cameras are barred from certain proceedings, including those in chambers, jury selection and proceedings otherwise closed to the public. In the main, Rule 980 has worked well; the public has been served by the wider access to the courts that television allows and the interests of litigants have been protected. Forty-six other states allow cameras in courtrooms under certain circumstances.

The California Judges Assn. had contemplated backing possible rule revisions for some time; its membership was deeply divided on this issue. Indeed, its nonbinding vote Saturday was less an endorsement of televising trials than it was a referendum on the need to retain judicial discretion over this matter.

The vote is not the end of this matter. Gov. Pete Wilson asked the Judicial Council last fall to consider changing its Rule 980 to ban cameras in the courtroom. The council, the rule-making and administrative arm of the state courts, convened a task force that is preparing its recommendation for a council meeting next week. The council will take final action on the rule in May.

Separately, Assembly member Bernie Richter, a Chico Republican, has introduced a bill, AB 2023, that would ban cameras altogether. But the debate and the voting at the meeting of the California Judges Assn. clearly demonstrated that even those judges who oppose cameras are uncomfortable with lawmakers telling them how to run their courtrooms. We share their concern.