ThreadSky
About ThreadSky
Log In
rmfifthcircuit.bsky.social
•
2 days ago
I found this old criminal case with a sealed courtroom, but as I would expect, the Court ordered special briefing before doing so to take into account the public's right to access.
Comments
Log in
with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
[–]
matthewschafer.bsky.social
•
2 days ago
There should be findings of fact on the record showing:
There is a substantial probability of prejudice to a compelling interest.
There is no alternative to closure
Any restriction on access will protect against the harm.
Any restriction on access is narrowly tailored.
3
1
reply
[–]
matthewschafer.bsky.social
•
2 days ago
Even in the Pentagon Papers case the government asked for closure and the Court denied it.
And, even if an argument requires closure, usually a separate shorter closed session would be the narrow tailoring required. Not wholesale closure.
2
reply
[–]
sandy5.bsky.social
•
2 days ago
Thank you for investigating these anomalies. It's important.
7
reply
Posting Rules
Be respectful to others
No spam or self-promotion
Stay on topic
Follow Bluesky's terms of service
×
Reply
Post Reply
Comments
There is a substantial probability of prejudice to a compelling interest.
There is no alternative to closure
Any restriction on access will protect against the harm.
Any restriction on access is narrowly tailored.
And, even if an argument requires closure, usually a separate shorter closed session would be the narrow tailoring required. Not wholesale closure.