(The Center Square) – The Arizona Court of Appeals has ruled the public does not have the right to know the names of jurors who are hearing cases.
The three-judge panel rejected arguments by David Morgan, publisher of the Cochise County Record and moderator of a Facebook group that follows local court proceedings, who argued the public has the First Amendment right to juror information.
Morgan said the information of jurors has been public for 100 years and there has been no evidence of juror harassment.
Morgan’s fight for court transparency began in October 2017, when Cochise County Attorney Brian McIntyre sued to require Morgan to unpublish a link to a full, unredacted grand jury transcript involving a local homicide. McIntyre claimed Morgan violated an Arizona statute mandating grand jury secrecy. The Arizona Court of Appeals ruled in Morgan’s favor in 2019.
Morgan said the reason it is important to keep the names of jurors public is to prevent the abuse of trial jury practices. He told The Center Square his concerns are about secrecy permeating the courtroom.
“How do we know that the juries are being honest about themselves, what they believe, and what their backgrounds are? And how do we know that juries are really composed of a broad section of our community; are they really a jury of our peers?” Morgan said. “When you start making things in the court system secret, in my opinion, you get big problems.”
A 2007 Arizona law shields the names of jurors “unless specifically required by law or ordered by the court.” Morgan said the aim of this law was to prevent those within the legal system from divulging information when the law did not require it. However, for the past century, the release of juror information has been a legal requirement.
Trial judges still have the discretion to determine whether jurors remain anonymous, but if the judge decides to seal their names, journalists can no longer demand them, Morgan said.
Judge Christopher Staring said in his ruling that making juror information public could deter citizens from sitting on a jury.
“Once a juror’s name is public, with the current availability of information through the internet and other sources, a vast array of information about them is accessible – sometimes in a matter of seconds,” Staring wrote for the panel.
Staring wrote that because the case concerns information held by the government, it is “outside the scope of the First Amendment right of access.”
Morgan, represented by the First Amendment Law Clinic at Arizona State University, is asking the Arizona Supreme Court to review the case, and he believes it likely will consider it. If the Arizona Supreme Court rules against him, Morgan will ask the U.S Supreme Court for review.
Morgan said the court has just made it harder to determine the honesty of jurors.
“We’ve just reduced our chances of a fair trial, either fair to the state, the prosecution, the defense, or to the public in general,” he said.
By Elizabeth Troutman | The Center Square contributor
