I am late getting this up — as many other billable duties have ruled my day — but I was thinking of all of you, here. Smile.
“…ORDER as to Martin Shkreli.
The court has received several informal press requests for the names of the jurors in United States v. Shkreli. By August 11, 2017, news organizations seeking disclosure of juror names shall file a letter, not to exceed three pages, describing their request and citing to any applicable legal authority. By the same date, the parties in this case may, but need not, submit letters setting forward their position on disclosure of juror names. Ordered by Judge Kiyo A. Matsumoto on 8/9/2017….”
The standards here are pretty clear, under existing First Amendment case law that the press has a right of qualified access to the juror’s names. United States v. Wecht, 537 F.3d 222 (2008). See generally State ex rel. Beacon Journal Publ’g Co. v. Bond, 98 Ohio St. 3d 146, 156 (2002); People v. Mitchell, 233 Mich. App. 604, 605-06 (Mich. Ct. App. 1999).
Absent a particularized concern, backed by evidence, and by formal motion, from the able AUSAs that (for example) Mr. Shkreli might menace or threaten the jurors, directly or through his army of brain-dead internet zombies/trolls — once he reads the names in the paper — I think we will know their identities by the end of August.
Now you know. Onward, on a very busy office week for me here. I’ll be scarce, in comments. But smiling — just the same.