Globe Newspaper Company v. Daniel F. Pokaski, Etc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that time, place, and manner restrictions “need only be reasonable to survive First Amendment scrutiny”
• indicating that a statute that restricts public access to judicial records in criminal cases by “placing] on the public the burden of overcoming inertia” is impermissible
• explaining that courts must determine whether the state has selected the “least restrictive means of promoting its objective”
• noting that right applies to records in cases ending in acquittal, dismissal, nolle prosequi, or a finding of no probable cause, but does not extend to records in cases where grand jury opts not to indict
• rejecting blanket sealing rule on ground that case-by-case evaluation of defendants’ sealing requests represented a viable less restrictive means
• adopting “as the appropriate standard the traditional compelling interest/least restrictive means test” to its analysis as to whether to close criminal court records

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).