Gannett Co., Inc. v. Depasquale 443 U.S. 368 (1978)
GANNETT CO., INC. v. DEPASQUALE 443 U.S. 368 (1978)
In Gannett the trial judge excluded the public, including the press, from a pretrial hearing involving evidence of an involuntary confession in a highly publicized murder case. The Supreme Court rejected arguments that the Sixth Amendment provided a constitutional public right to attend criminal trials. Reasoning that the constitutional guarantee of a public trial is designed to benefit the defendant, not the public, the Court concluded that where the litigants agree to close a pretrial proceeding to protect the defendant's right to a fair trial, the Constitution does not require that it remain open to the public. The Court declined to address the corollary issue whether the first amendment created a right of access to the press to attend criminal trials—a question later answered affirmatively in richmond newspapers, inc. v. virginia (1980).
Justice lewis f. powell, concurring, conceded that the press had an interest, protected by the First Amendment, in being present at the pretrial hearing, but said that this interest should be balanced against the defendant's right to a fair trial. The order excluding the press from attending the pretrial hearing in Gannett was distinguished from the gag order in nebraska press association v. stuart (1976) because the press was merely excluded from one source of information; it was not told what it might or might not publish.
Justice harry a. blackmun, joined by Justices william j. brennan, byron r. white, and thurgood marshall, also framed the issue as one of access to the judicial proceeding, not one of prior restraint on the press. Blackmun, upon a lengthy historical examination, concluded that the criminally accused did not have a right to compel a private pretrial proceeding or trial. Only in certain circumstances, with appropriate procedural safeguards, might a court give effect to the accused's attempts to waive the right to a public trial.
Kim m c Lane Wardlaw
(see also: Free Press/Fair Trial.)
"Gannett Co., Inc. v. Depasquale 443 U.S. 368 (1978)." Encyclopedia of the American Constitution. . Encyclopedia.com. 16 Jan. 2019 <https://www.encyclopedia.com>.
"Gannett Co., Inc. v. Depasquale 443 U.S. 368 (1978)." Encyclopedia of the American Constitution. . Encyclopedia.com. (January 16, 2019). https://www.encyclopedia.com/politics/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/gannett-co-inc-v-depasquale-443-us-368-1978
"Gannett Co., Inc. v. Depasquale 443 U.S. 368 (1978)." Encyclopedia of the American Constitution. . Retrieved January 16, 2019 from Encyclopedia.com: https://www.encyclopedia.com/politics/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/gannett-co-inc-v-depasquale-443-us-368-1978
Encyclopedia.com gives you the ability to cite reference entries and articles according to common styles from the Modern Language Association (MLA), The Chicago Manual of Style, and the American Psychological Association (APA).
Within the “Cite this article” tool, pick a style to see how all available information looks when formatted according to that style. Then, copy and paste the text into your bibliography or works cited list.
Because each style has its own formatting nuances that evolve over time and not all information is available for every reference entry or article, Encyclopedia.com cannot guarantee each citation it generates. Therefore, it’s best to use Encyclopedia.com citations as a starting point before checking the style against your school or publication’s requirements and the most-recent information available at these sites:
Modern Language Association
The Chicago Manual of Style
American Psychological Association
- Most online reference entries and articles do not have page numbers. Therefore, that information is unavailable for most Encyclopedia.com content. However, the date of retrieval is often important. Refer to each style’s convention regarding the best way to format page numbers and retrieval dates.
- In addition to the MLA, Chicago, and APA styles, your school, university, publication, or institution may have its own requirements for citations. Therefore, be sure to refer to those guidelines when editing your bibliography or works cited list.