New York Democrats Push for Pathway to Televise Trump Trial

Since the Great Depression, the state of New York has reigned as one of the most restrictive in the country when it comes to court reporting, with long-standing bans on cameras, recording devices and broadcast equipment that are otherwise essential to the public being able to see and hear what takes place in the state's courtrooms.

With former President Donald Trump scheduled to be arraigned Tuesday in Manhattan to begin what could be the most-scrutinized public proceeding in state history, however, that tradition might come to an end.

Trump was indicted by a grand jury in Manhattan on Thursday on allegations that he manipulated business records to offer a hush money payment of $130,000 to former adult film star Stormy Daniels during the 2016 election cycle to stop her from going public about an affair they allegedly had. Trump, who denies the affair, is the first former president to face criminal charges.

On Monday, Manhattan Democrat and state Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Brad Hoylman-Sigal officially introduced legislation to lift the ban on audio-visual equipment in court, offering news outlets the ability to livestream the event and give people an unvarnished view of the proceedings against Trump.

If passed, the legislation would make Washington, D.C., the only other place in the country that outlaws their use in the courtroom, ending a tradition that made New York one of the nation's most-restrictive media environments for court reporters.

"As the media capital of the world—and the venue for the arraignment of Donald Trump—we must change this outdated law to allow the public to witness trials," Hoylman-Sigal said during a Sunday press conference announcing the bill. "With a first-of-its-kind trial on the horizon, there's no time to waste in opening the doors of the courthouse to the media and the American public."

Newsweek reached out to Trump's campaign via email for comment.

Trump's attorneys have already lobbied to ban cameras on Tuesday, arguing in a letter obtained by CNN that it would "create a circus-like atmosphere at the arraignment, raise unique security concerns, and is inconsistent with President Trump's presumption of innocence."

Efforts to film Trump's trial already has supporters, particularly in the media.

On Friday, Maggie Haberman—a CNN political analyst and a reporter for the New York Times—made an appeal on the network that cameras in the courtroom were of a "compelling public interest argument."

"People have a habit of taping Donald Trump," Haberman said. "And they have a habit of taping Donald Trump, because he spins his own reality, and will contradict whatever people say about him. A camera would be pretty vital, in terms of people understanding what happened, and not being told that something, it's fake news."

Legislation might be the only avenue to get there. Haberman added she was "skeptical" the ban would be lifted, noting that in the time she covered courts there, she came to understand "how against cameras in the courtroom judges are" in New York.

If Hoylman-Sigal's bill were to pass, it could be right on time for the trial. According to New York State law, the proposal—introduced as part of the state budget—would take effect 90 days after becoming law.

Trump's trial is not expected to start for months, and could even be delayed until after the 2024 election in which he again is running for president.