More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Adam Bink

GET UPDATES FROM Adam Bink
 

Why the 9th Circuit Decision on the Prop 8 Tapes Undermines Our Democracy

Posted: 02/ 3/2012 1:08 pm

Yesterday, Feb. 2, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a district court's previous ruling to release the video recordings of the Perry v. Brown trial. The 2010 trial, about the constitutionality of Proposition 8, a voter-approved constitutional amendment restricting marriage to heterosexual couples, was widely followed, and resulted in a landmark ruling supporting marriage equality under both the Equal Protection and Due Process provisions of the U.S. Constitution. Yesterday's appellate ruling means that the public will not get to watch footage from the historic trial, in a loss for transparency and the free dissemination of information. The plaintiffs working to release the tapes did not yet immediately indicate whether they would appeal the decision.

The Perry trial should have included a public broadcast from the beginning. District Court Judge Vaughn Walker entered the trial into a pilot program begun by the 9th Circuit to allow cameras into the courtroom. That pilot program was specifically created for high-profile, high-interest cases like Perry v. Brown -- cases in which the public would have something to learn from watching the proceedings that occurred in court. Judge Walker sought to gauge public opinion on the broadcast through a public comment period. The results: 138,574 comments in favor (many of them through Courage Campaign's petition, which was ultimately cited in the Supreme Court dissent on the matter), and 32 comments opposed.

Nevertheless, the proponents of Proposition 8 went all the way to the Supreme Court to make sure the trial was not broadcast. They claimed that their witnesses would face retribution from marriage equality supporters. The Supreme Court agreed and stayed the broadcast. Walker withdrew the case from the pilot program and recorded the trial proceedings for his own use in chambers.

In its ruling yesterday, the 9th Circuit did not address the spurious claims of Prop 8's proponents that a public broadcast would endanger their witnesses and supporters. The proponents have not been able to prove their claims in court, and the 9th Circuit panel considering the appeal was rightfully skeptical of these allegations when it heard oral arguments in December. Nonetheless, they have chosen to keep the tapes under seal, reversing the lower court decision of Judge James Ware, who took over the case after Judge Walker retired. Judge Ware agreed with the opponents of Prop 8 and a broad coalition of media companies that the public had a right to see trial for themselves.

It is admirable for the 9th Circuit to argue, as it did in its ruling, that the integrity of the judicial system is of paramount importance to its very success. Yes, Judge Walker did promise the proponents of Prop 8 that there would be no public broadcast of the trial recordings. And there wasn't.

In choosing to keep the recordings under seal, the 9th Circuit has unfortunately dealt a blow to transparency in the courtroom. There is no new information contained in the recordings that is not already part of the public record. The trial's full transcript can be found online, and has been reenacted by both celebrities and regular citizens alike who wanted to spread the word about this historic trial. A star-studded production of the play 8, written by Milk screenwriter Dustin Lance Black and based on the transcripts, was performed last fall in New York. Another celebrity cast will perform the show in Los Angeles this March.

Rather, the recordings contain something more powerful and more intangible than mere words. They contain body language, tone of voice, and the many other verbal and non-verbal cues that we use to communicate with one another. Because the 9th Circuit has chosen to keep the recordings sealed, the public may never have the chance to experience the Perry trial in all its complexity. And that is a loss for all of us.

This post was co-written with Jacob Combs.

 
Yesterday, Feb. 2, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a district court's previous ruling to release the video recordings of the Perry v. Brown trial. The 2010 trial, about the constitutional...
Yesterday, Feb. 2, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a district court's previous ruling to release the video recordings of the Perry v. Brown trial. The 2010 trial, about the constitutional...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 22
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Diana Scrimger
09:15 AM on 02/06/2012
I think that the Yes on Prop 8 man is getting a good laugh about this one. Why do you think that he is not straight! They are forgotten that it is only an AKA! Which proves that you cannot marry an AKA!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Diana Scrimger
09:09 AM on 02/06/2012
The Yews on Prop 8 side is going to win. Marriage is between a man and a woman. The Yes on Prop 8 man is openly straight! What about Publicly Broadcasting the tapes?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
01:07 PM on 02/07/2012
In MANY places marriage is between man/man, woman/woman and man/woman. Ten countries have extended CIVIL marriage rights to same sex couples as far back as 12 years ago: Argentina, Belgium, Canada, Iceland, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, South Africa, Spain and Sweden. Six US states + DC have also extended CIVIL marriage rights to same sex couples. The same sex marriages in these jurisdictions are all LEGAL civil marriages.

Please support Marriage Equality for all Americans.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Diana Scrimger
03:13 PM on 02/07/2012
We never thought that the Ninth Cirucit court hated Public Broadcasting so much!
09:09 PM on 02/05/2012
One solution to the gay marriage issue would be to deal with this at the local level: not federal or state. Form special committees or boards similar to the old draft boards. These would be made up of counselors, psychologists, and ministers. They would review applicants and then make a sensible decision. I would institute this for all people who want to get married. We have let marriage become as easy as getting a magazine subscription and this country has paid the price: huge divorce rate, family violence, emotional and psychological damage to children.
02:23 PM on 02/06/2012
Domestic violence and child abuse are not new. In fact, those used to be perfectly acceptable, back when marriage was more "restricted".

And complaining about the divorce rate is begging the question.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jonandian
Small Business Owner RepubliCANT Debater
09:05 PM on 02/03/2012
Its ok if the tapes do not get released, even though that is a violation of the freedom of information act and first amendment but what is new from discriminators.

We still have the transcripts to read and re-enact in the 8 play and other places that re-enact them. They cannot hide the truth that they have no case.

Dont worry California, we should thank the hate filled NOM & Yes on 8 people because of them Same Sex Marriage will be the law of the land when the supreme court rules Prop 8 and ALL gay bans unconstitutional.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Skeptical Cicada
06:09 PM on 02/03/2012
"Judge Walker did promise the proponents of Prop 8 that there would be no public broadcast of the trial recordings."

Yes, he did. End of discussion.

I would love to get to see the trial too, but there is no general mechanism for a federal judge to allow cameras in the courtroom. It is a controversial issue under general study by the courts themselves.

We're seeking equality--not some special right to bend the ordinary rules.
09:55 PM on 02/03/2012
And don't you think that if the 9th Curcuit Court were to "bend" the rules and open the tapes to the public that the Prop 8 supporters would jump all over that with legal complaints and reasons to stretch this out even further. Now they can't complain that anything "out of the ordinary" was used to somehow try to weaken their case - which they have already done quite a masterful job of doing all on their own. Maybe lose the battle - but win the war MUCH sooner this way!!!
04:28 AM on 02/04/2012
While I would prefer that the tapes be released, our desire to see them DOES NOT outweigh the promise made by the judge. The integrity of the court is far more important than our mere curiosity.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DMSmith
02:37 PM on 02/05/2012
If the promise was without integrity - what does this say about the integrity of the court?
Your argument is silly on its face.
photo
werewolf90210
DVM, Ph.D.; Progressive Business Owner.
04:31 PM on 02/03/2012
I suppose the airing of these trial tapes could be just about as damning to the opponents of marriage equality as the dubious central premise in their whole argument.
02:26 PM on 02/06/2012
That's exactly what they're afraid of. Nobody buys that BS "experts will be endangered" story. How often do you read about anti-homophobic violence?
02:27 PM on 02/06/2012
I mean, a homophobic state senator is refused service at a restaurant and it makes NATIONAL NEWS. An LGBT person gets bashed and it's lucky to make the local papers.
MrStat1
I believe in the rule of law
04:16 PM on 02/03/2012
You miss the point. This was about a court ruling, only. The trial judge ruled the tape would not be released. The appeals court upheld his right to do this. It is nothing more than a point of law and courtroom judicial procedure.
03:57 PM on 02/03/2012
As much as I would love to see the videos of this trial, and I think it is important for everyone to see them as well, I do understand the ruling. Judge Walker did promise the proponents of Prop 8 that there would be no public broadcast of the trial recordings. Period. It is my hope that someday down the road, they will eventually be released. This is a minor set-back. The case is still to be decided on its merits. The transcripts ARE available for the public to read. I have read every single word from soup to nuts, and I encourage everyone to take the time to read them for themselves. The proponents had no case, they knew it, and now they do not want anyone to see that fact. The truth will out.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:34 PM on 02/05/2012
2020 they can be released by then hopefully it will be smooth point
03:35 PM on 02/03/2012
Year after year we see a growing increase of documents labelled classified and kept from the public view. It reeks of the growing power of big brother government, and both parties are guilty of it. All we are given to decide our future is meaningless sound bites in debates and campaign promises that run counter to a politicians past career yet we are suppose to believe. Look at Obama's record and it is clear he has always been loyal to his moderate roots, are we to believe Romney will be true to his new found conservatism if elected? I am sick of these campaign Casanova's whispering sweet nothings in our ears.
02:51 PM on 02/03/2012
Mr. Bink. Being the first to comment and hopefully not the only one." I believe most Americans don't understand how America.works. THEIR WAY. It's too late. Don't you see what's going on. I't been going on for years,
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rockysparks
there's no law against being annoying.
02:42 PM on 02/03/2012
Adam:

Excellent argument in favor of the release of the tapes.

One thing you left out, if you know the answer --- why not provide everyone reading here with an online link to the tapes?

Rocky