Abstract
Maintaining social distance in the time of COVID-19 is a public health priority. A crowded courtroom is an environment at odds with public health needs. Accordingly, until science determines otherwise, it will be necessary for judges to manage courtroom attendance and exclude the public from trials, wholly or in part. Courtrooms may be closed to the public, despite the Sixth Amendment’s right to a public trial, when the closure is justified by a strong government interest and is narrowly tailored to further that interest. Typically, this heightened scrutiny is applied on a case-by-case basis and turns on a case’s specific circumstances. This Article proposes that in this period of pandemic, with indisputably strong government interests in public health and with few means available beyond closure to satisfy those interests, courtroom closures may be ordered by trial courts, and approved by appellate courts, almost categorically. It further suggests that there are alternative protections available that may be employed by courts to further the Sixth Amendment’s good government purposes in this time of emergency.
Recommended Citation
Stephen E. Smith, The Right to a Public Trial in the Time of COVID-19, 77 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. Online 1 (2020), https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr-online/vol77/iss1/1
Included in
Constitutional Law Commons, Courts Commons, Criminal Law Commons, Criminal Procedure Commons, Health Law and Policy Commons