The media has been barred from broadcasting courtroom proceedings since 1946 in the U.S. Although some pilot programs have tested recording equipment to document civil proceedings in federal trial and appellate courts, criminal proceedings have consistently remained beyond the scope.
Recently, a coalition of news outlets approached U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan seeking permission to broadcast the D.C. trial. Their argument centers on the historical significance of the case, claiming it warrants an exception to the stringent rule that they argue infringes upon the First Amendment. They also posit that live video coverage would counter conspiracy theories surrounding the case.
Notably, the trial of former President Trump in Georgia's Fulton County, facing charges related to an alleged racketeering scheme to overturn the 2020 presidential election results, will be broadcast live. State cases can make individual broadcasting decisions, and Supreme Court precedent allows televised trials, provided the defendants' rights to due process and a fair trial are protected.
Initially neutral on televising the trial, according to his lawyers' filing, Trump changed course on Friday, filing a motion urging Chutkan to allow live broadcasting. His legal team contends that a televised trial is necessary due to perceived unfair treatment by the Biden administration and the alleged secretive pursuit of the election case by Smith.
Contrary to these assertions, news organizations have extensively covered the D.C. election interference case and Trump's legal challenges. While the filing doesn't establish a legal precedent, Trump's lawyers argue that he insists on full television coverage to show the American public that the case is an unconstitutional charade.
In response, Smith contends that Trump's supposed interest in shedding "sunlight" on the judicial process contradicts the long-standing broadcast prohibition for high-profile federal criminal trials. Smith accuses Trump of attempting to create a carnival atmosphere to divert attention from the charges against him.
Drawing from Trump's behavior in the ongoing $250 million civil fraud case in Manhattan, Smith urges the judge to consider how Trump and his legal team strategically craft their in-court statements to mount a public relations campaign. He warns against allowing a spectacle in the courtroom and the potential for witness intimidation.
In what appears to be an aggressive response, Trump used his social media site, TruthSocial, to threaten that Smith and other perceived adversaries would be confined to a mental institution by the end of his second term as president.
It's not unexpected that the former reality TV star seeks to publicize his legal challenges, having demonstrated skill in campaigning from the courtroom. In doing so, he maintains a prominent position in the news cycle, effectively advancing the martyrdom narrative he has cultivated over the past several years.
Chutkan has set a trial date of March 4 for Trump's election interference case.