WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

S 9790

Relates to audio-visual coverage of judicial proceedings by the media; repealer

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Robert Jackson and 3 co-sponsors

The bill creates a judge-controlled framework allowing audio-visual media coverage of court proceedings with clear rules, safeguards, and the possibility to restrict or prohibit co

ADVANCED TO THIRD READING
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · S 9790

Overview

Senate Bill S. 9790 (New York, 2025-2026 session) aims to regulate audio-visual coverage of judicial proceedings by the media in appellate and trial courts, with specific rules on equipment, placement, and limitations. It repeals existing sections (Judiciary Law Section 218 and Civil Rights Law Section 52) and creates a new framework for media coverage, including restrictions to protect privacy, safety, and the integrity of proceedings. The act becomes law 90 days after enactment.

Main purpose and intent

  • Establish a formal, judge-controlled framework for media (audio-visual and still photography) coverage of public court proceedings.
  • Balance transparency and public access with safeguards for safety, privacy, attorney-client privilege, and the orderly administration of justice.
  • Provide clear definitions, procedural rules, and appellate oversight for coverage decisions.

Key provisions and changes

  • Section 218 (new): Audio-visual coverage allowed in trial and appellate courts with judicial discretion to prohibit or limit coverage to ensure safety and fair administration of justice.

    • Definitions:
    • Proceeding: any action or proceeding in a New York court.
    • Media: broad definition including news agencies, reporters, networks, newspapers, magazines, etc.
    • Equipment and personnel (non-matrimonial/family matters):
    • At least one compact video camera, operated by no more than one camera person (judge can permit more at own discretion).
    • Up to one audio system for radio broadcast.
    • Use of existing courtroom audio systems; if none, unobtrusive microphones may be added, placed in designated spots by the judge.
    • If the courtroom has suitable cameras, the judge may provide a media feed from those cameras upon request.
    • Additional equipment/personnel and costs borne by the media entity.
    • Media pooling arrangements are the responsibility of media, not the judge; without agreement, the judge may exclude all media.
    • Sound and light: equipment must minimize noise and light; no artificial lighting for video.
    • Positioning: cameras/photographers must stay in designated locations; no moving about during proceedings.
    • Movement: equipment cannot be moved during proceedings except before/after daily sessions; changes allowed only during recess with judge approval.
    • Lighting: courts may modify lighting with administrative consent and without public expense.
    • Restrictions and ongoing control by judge: the presiding judge can revoke or limit coverage at any time; several specific restrictions apply (detailed below).
    • Specific coverage restrictions (highlights):
    • No coverage of attorney-client conferences in court; no chambers conferences.
    • No coverage of voir dire.
    • No coverage of jurors, juror deliberations, or jurors in the jury box (jury foreperson may be filmed delivering a verdict with consent).
    • No coverage of covert/undercover officers without consent.
    • No coverage of sexual assault victims (with patient privacy options: cover testimony with the victim’s image obscured, or permit footage of testimony with obscured image if requested).
    • No coverage of arraignments or suppression hearings without all parties’ consent (counsel for indigent defendants protected per CPL).
    • Proceedings cannot be scheduled/delayed for media convenience.
    • No coverage that endangers safety.
    • No coverage focusing on family members of victims or parties, except while testifying; media must use reasonable efforts to identify and avoid coverage of family members.
    • Impermissible use of media material: footage or recordings cannot be admitted as evidence or for retrial/appeal purposes.
    • Written orders: any restrictions must be in writing, with specific showing of good cause; include a presumption of good cause for minors and certain civil-rights-protected individuals.
    • Courtroom closure: no coverage when the courtroom is closed to the public.
    • Appellate review: orders under this section are subject to CPLR Article 78 review and expedited appellate review rules.
    • Regulations: Chief Administrator to issue implementing rules after public input, ensuring coverage does not disrupt decorum and dignity.

  • Section 52 of the Civil Rights Law repealed.

  • Contempt provisions (Judiciary Law § 751(5), as amended):

    • If a media member willfully disobeys a court order under this framework, penalties may include fines up to $5,000 per day and/or up to 30 days in jail, or both. Courts consider factors such as defiance, gain from the disobedience, and impact on the public and parties.

  • Effective date: 90 days after enactment.

Who would be affected

  • Media organizations and reporters seeking to cover public judicial proceedings with audio-visual or still photography.
  • Judges and court personnel who would issue, enforce, and potentially restrict coverage.
  • Defendants, plaintiffs, witnesses, jurors, and victims, whose rights to privacy, safety, or fair trial protections are specifically addressed (e.g., attorney-client privilege, juror protection, victim privacy).
  • Court facilities and administrators responsible for implementing equipment standards, pooling arrangements, and regulatory compliance.

Procedural and timeline aspects

  • Authority rests with the presiding judge to approve, restrict, or revoke coverage on an ongoing basis.
  • Initial equipment, pooling, and placement decisions are guided by the statute, with media bearing costs and responsible for pooling agreements.
  • Written orders and expedited appellate review processes apply when coverage issues are challenged.
  • The act tasks the Chief Administrator with issuing implementing regulations after a public comment period.
  • The act becomes effective 90 days after enactment.

Practical implications

  • Greater transparency of court proceedings is facilitated, subject to structured safeguards.
  • Courts gain explicit authority to limit or block media coverage to protect participants and the integrity of high-stakes proceedings.
  • Media organizations must coordinate among themselves and bear coverage costs; noncompliance carries defined contempt penalties.
  • Privacy and safety protections for victims, witnesses, and certain participants are codified with explicit exceptions and procedures.

If you’d like, I can provide a side-by-side comparison with current law (Judiciary Law § 218 and Civil Rights Law § 52) to highlight all changes and transitional considerations.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.