Mediaboss Marketing

Platteville Journal Editor Steve Prestegard writes about his recent encounter with Madison Diocese Bishop Robert Morlino over whether he could document a speech by the bishop in a public UW-Plattevile building. Let's just say that on this Thanksgiving Day, Prestegard is thankful for the county's First Amendment.

We have plenty for which to be thankful, editorializes the La Crosse Tribune today. The paper goes on to list a number of civic deeds that have made the area a better place this past year.

Yes, reminds the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, it was during a terrible war that President Abraham Lincoln found reasons to give thanks and proclaimed the nation's first Thanksgiving Day.

Back on the political front, the Racine Journal Times editorializes that Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan is in a place, as chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, to deliver tax code reform. Let's hope he gets some bipartisan support to make it happen, the paper adds.

On his Political Environment blog, James Rowen cites an op-ed by Mary Beth Elliott on the proposed expansion of the Enbridge tar sands pipeline that ought to gain the attention of the Dane County Board. The more Elliott's word can be spread, he says, the better the chances of avoiding a destructive environmental accident like occurred recently in Michigan.

Original post:
State Debate: Recounting Bishop Morlino incident, Platteville editor thankful for First Amendment

(Part One) Gadsden County First amendment Audit
description.

By: HONORYOUROATH

Read the original:
(Part One) Gadsden County First amendment Audit - Video

Supreme Court to hear case on social media and First Amendment rights
Supreme Court to hear case on social media and First Amendment rights.

By: 41 Action News

See the original post:
Supreme Court to hear case on social media and First Amendment rights - Video

In a ruling that is drawing sharp criticism from free-speech advocates, a Superior Court judge has ordered the Connecticut Law Tribune not to publish a story about a child custody case.

Judge Stephen Frazzini on Monday granted a motion filed in New Britain Superior Court by the mother of the three children involved in the case that sought to stop the Law Tribune from running the story.

Daniel J. Klau, the lawyer representing the Law Tribune, objected to the mother's motion, saying a prior restraint on the publication was a violation of the First Amendment. The information for the story, he said, was lawfully obtained by the Tribune. He declined to elaborate about the information.

"Prohibiting the publication of a news story is the very essence of censorship," Klau said. On Tuesday, he filed a motion asking the state's appellate court to stay the lower court's injunction.

"We certainly hope that the judges review the motion immediately and overturn the order or, at a bare minimum, grant us an immediate hearing in the appellate court next week, if not earlier," Klau said.

Klau said the judge's ruling, which Frazzini made orally from the bench Monday, and a transcript of the proceedings were sealed from public view as of Tuesday. He said he was barred from speaking about specifics of the judge's ruling, even with his own client. The Connecticut Law Tribune is owned by American Lawyer Media.

In an email statement Tuesday, Sandra Staub, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut, called the ruling "alarming" and an infringement on free speech.

"The courts are supposed to protect speech, not prohibit it," Staub said. "Prior restraint is forbidden under the U.S. Constitution, with extremely narrow exceptions that do not apply in this case, and in our view is absolutely prohibited by the Connecticut Constitution."

A widely recognized exception is in cases that involve national security.

In a story on the Law Tribune's website posted Tuesday, Thomas B. Scheffey wrote that Monday's proceedings were held in juvenile court where the hearings are not usually open to the public.

Read this article:
Judge Orders Law Tribune Not To Publish Story

Published November 26, 2014

PHOENIX An appeals court has thrown out a ruling that barred the public from watching the first witness called by Jodi Arias at the convicted murderer's sentencing retrial.

The decision Wednesday by the Arizona Court of Appeals overturns the Oct. 30 ruling by Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Sherry Stephens and suggests that the previously unidentified witness may have been Arias herself.

Stephens had said the ruling was necessary because Arias' first witness, whom the judge refused to publicly identify, wouldn't testify unless the hearing was closed to the public. Some of the testimony by Arias' first witness was conducted in private. The Arizona Republic and three Phoenix TV stations KPNX, KPHO and KTVK protested the closure of the courtroom, arguing the First Amendment allows reporters to attend the trial.

Arias was convicted of murder last year in the 2008 death of former boyfriend Travis Alexander, but jurors deadlocked on whether she should be sentenced to life in prison or death. A new jury has been picked to decide her sentence.

The appeals court didn't offer an explanation in its ruling Wednesday at how it arrived at that decision. A more detailed ruling is expected in the future.

But the court suggested an answer to a question that stumped trial watchers: Who was the skittish witness who was allowed to testify in private?

The appeals court said Stephens order closed the courtroom to the public during "any testimony by Jodi Arias," though it's unclear whether the testimony was made by Arias herself or someone else on Arias' behalf.

"It underscores the importance of the public's right to attend criminal trials, particularly the testimony of a defendant in the sentencing phase of a capital trial," David Bodney, an attorney representing the news organizations, said of the ruling.

A call to Arias attorney Jennifer Willmott wasn't immediately returned Wednesday afternoon.

Excerpt from:
Court throws out ruling that barred public from watching 1st witness called by Jodi Arias