To Televise or Not: Prop 8 Backers Fear Intimidation, Reprisals

The backers of Proposition 8 --- who will defend the initiative at a federal trail that starts on Jan. 11 --- argue that the proceedings should not be televised.

In a letter sent to U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn Walker on Monday, their attorney, Charles Cooper, says that some of their witnesses fear that the exposure from the trial will subject them to harassment, as was the case in the protests and backlash in the aftermath of the 2008 elections.

"Given the highly contentious and politicized nature of Proposition 8 and the issue of same-sex marriage in general, the possibility of compromised safety, witness intimidation, and/or harassment of trial participants is very real," Cooper wrote. He added that "some potential witnesses have indicated that they will not be willing to testify at all if the trial is broadcast or webcast beyond the courthouse."

A media coalition, including all of the major broadcast networks, the Associated Press and Hearst Corp., want to show video from the proceedings, with In Session (formerly Court TV), providing the pool feed.

Their effort is supported by the plaintiffs in the case, who are represented by legal eagles Ted Olson and David Boies. Ted Boutrous, a member of the legal team, sent a letter to Walker late Tuesday arguing that given the "overwhelming national public interest" in the issus facing the court, "providing a broadcast of the proceedings is the most effective means of affording the public its constitutionally guaranteed right of access." He also dismissed concerns of witness intimidation and harassment, noting that Walker could decide to ban cameras in certain parts of the trial.

Moreover, he noted that the supporters of Prop 8 thrust themselves into the public eye by waging the campaig. "They certainly did not exhibit a similar fear of public attention when attempting to garner votes for Prop. 8 from millions of California voters, when touting their successful campaign strategy in post-election magazine articles and public appearances, or when voluntarily intervening in the case," he wrote. 

Walker has not indicated when and if he will issue any decision. As it stands now, he is not allowing cameras, but a recent announcement by the Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit gave district judges the discretion to do so in non jury federal civil cases.

My print Variety story on the prospect of televising the case is here.