Washington, D.C. — In response to news that Judge Amit Mehta has denied a motion filed by the New York Times and other prominent media outlets’ for increased access to the U.S. v. Google trial — the most important antitrust trial of the century — the American Economic Liberties Project released the following statement.

“The outcome of the Justice’ Department’s trial against Google — and other upcoming, high-profile antitrust and criminal trials — will impact the lives of hundreds of millions of Americans. It’s disheartening to hear that judges in these cases still refuse to provide basic transparency to media outlets looking to cover them,” said Katherine Van Dyck, Senior Counsel at the American Economic Liberties Project. “The Federal Judiciary must adapt to how the modern world accesses information and change its rules to allow federal courts to broadcast trials. It has been studying cameras in the courtroom since at least 1988. Multiple committees have submitted reports recommending courtrooms in the camera, for civil and criminal proceedings.”

“The Federal Rules Committee has also received numerous petitions outlining the need for stricter rules and procedures governing what can and cannot be sealed from public view,” added Van Dyck. “Otherwise, we end up in this situation, where a major antitrust trial spanning multiple months is subject to unpredictable procedures and rulings about the public’s very real First Amendment right of access to trials, testimony, and exhibits.”

An overarching theme throughout the Google Search trial has been its secrecy. With its seemingly endless legal resources, Google has pushed hard to keep information about the events of the trial private, which has made it difficult — almost impossible — for reporters to cover it. This week, the New York Times, with the support of Bloomberg, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Post, and Law360 filed a motion with Judge Mehta seeking more access to trial exhibits and a procedure for media outlets to argue for public access in advance of any future sealed proceedings.

Before the trial began, the American Economic Liberties Project, along with Demand Progress, the Revolving Door Project, and Open Markets Institute filed a motion urging the Court to permit a publicly available audio feed of the unsealed portions of the trial. The Court denied that motion based on Federal Judiciary policies that Van Dyck calls “obsolete and anachronistic in the age of the internet and video streaming.”

Learn more about Economic Liberties here.

###

The American Economic Liberties Project works to ensure America’s system of commerce is structured to advance, rather than undermine, economic liberty, fair commerce, and a secure, inclusive democracy. Economic Liberties believes true economic liberty means entrepreneurs and businesses large and small succeed on the merits of their ideas and hard work; commerce empowers consumers, workers, farmers, and engineers instead of subjecting them to discrimination and abuse from financiers and monopolists; foreign trade arrangements support domestic security and democracy; and wealth is broadly distributed to support equitable political power.