# Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia

> Supreme Court of the United States · July 2, 1980 · 448 U.S. 555

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9428078

## Case

- **Full name:** RICHMOND NEWSPAPERS, INC., Et Al. v. VIRGINIA Et Al.
- **Court:** Supreme Court of the United States
- **Decided:** July 2, 1980
- **Citations:** 448 U.S. 555; 6 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 1833; 100 S. Ct. 2814; 65 L. Ed. 2d 973; 1980 U.S. LEXIS 18
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by White
- **Judges:** Burger, Court'S, White, Stevens, Brennan, Marshall, Stewart, Blackmun, Rehnquist, Powell
- **Cited by:** 1,698 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9428078

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- concluding that criminal trials are presumptively public and noting that “ ‘[wjithout publicity, all other checks are insufficient: in comparison of publicity, all other checks are of small account.... [Wjhatever other institutions might present themselves in the character of …
- stating that `the presumption of public trials is, of course, not at all incompatible with reasonable restrictions imposed upon courtroom behavior in the interest of decorum,' including the exclusion of the public and the press from conferences at the bench and in chambers whe…
- finding that the “right to attend criminal trials is implicit in the guarantees of the First Amendment,” and that “without the freedom to attend such trials, which people have exercised for centuries, important aspects of freedom of speech and of the press could be eviscerated”
- holding that the presumption of public access “applies to documents filed in connection with criminal proceedings”
- stating "that the right to attend criminal trials is implicit in the guarantees of the First Amendment; without the freedom to attend such trials ... important aspects of freedom of speech and 'of the press could be eviscerated.' ”

## Opinion text

Mr. Justice White,
concurring.
This ease would have been unnecessary had Gannett Co. v. DePasquale, 443 U. S. 368 (1979), construed the Sixth *582 Amendment to forbid excluding the public from criminal proceedings except in narrowly defined circumstances. But the Court there rejected the submission of four of us to this effect, thus requiring that the First Amendment issue involved here be addressed. On this issue, I concur in the opinion of The Chief Justice.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9428078. Public record. Not legal advice.