The trials of the Guantanamo Bay suspects have also been muzzled, hampering public scrutiny. [39] Similarly, as part of a plea bargain, John Walker Lindh accepted a gag order not to speak to the press or others. San Diego Judge Howard Shore also issued a gag order to activist Jeff Olson. [40] If the judge does not want those involved in your case to speak publicly about the case, he or she can issue a gag order. A muzzle order prevents everyone involved in your process from speaking to the public about the process until your case is closed. It is more common for a muzzle order to be applied to the parties and lawyers in the case. There has been speculation that a gag order could be imposed by the MCA on its press releases before they are made available to the public to “ensure maximum effectiveness.” Such releases should be approved by the president. [17] These claims in the media were later denied. [18] [dead link] See the full definition of gag order in the Dictionary of English Language Learners Police services issue muzzle orders to protect the identity of victims, especially minors, and also to prevent information about ongoing investigations from being known when its publication to the public could pose a threat to the cases or persons involved. The use of gag orders includes the retention of a company`s trade secrets, the protection of the integrity of ongoing police or military operations, and the protection of the privacy of victims or minors.

Conversely, they can be used as a disadvantage as a useful tool for those with financial means to intimidate witnesses and prevent the publication of information by using the legal system instead of other methods of intimidation. Strategic lawsuits against public participation contracts (SLAPP) can potentially be used in this way. [1] [2] In the United States, a court can order parties to a case not to comment on it, but does not have the power to prevent independent journalists from reporting on a case. As a result, information about a case is often passed on to the media, and the media often choose to publicly report this leaked information after receiving it. Most laws restricting what can be declared have generally been found to be unconstitutional and void. However, the gag provisions of the WIPO Copyright and Performances Act and the phonogram treaties were maintained. Muzzle decrees are sometimes used to ensure a fair trial by preventing publication before trial, although their use for this purpose is controversial, as they represent a potentially unconstitutional prior restriction that can lead the press to use less reliable sources such as unofficial statements and second or third party reports. [3] 18 United States.C.

Section 2705(b) (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986/Stored Communications Act) also provides for gag orders directing the recipient of an 18 U.S. order.C. Section 2703(d) not to disclose the existence of the order or investigation. [37] [Non-primary source needed] If you do not obey the muzzle order, the judge may find you in contempt of court. Being found in contempt of court means you may have to pay a fine or be sent to jail. A muzzle order (also known as a muzzle order or removal order) is an order, usually a court or government order, that prevents the publication or comments from being published or transmitted to unauthorized third parties. The term can sometimes be used by an employer or other institution on a private order. A company may include gag orders in contracts associated with partnerships, employment, and termination to protect trade secrets, intellectual property, sensitive information, and sometimes the company`s reputation. A gag order is the type of order. This may be a court order or a government order or a private order of an employer or other institution that restricts the publication of information or comments. It can also be called an oppressive order.

Most gag orders are used against participants involved in a prosecution or criminal case, especially if it is a widespread or sensational case. It is also used to prevent the media from publishing unwanted information on a particular topic. For example, a criminal court may issue a gag order for the media if it believes potential jurors are influenced by media coverage. In Sheppard v. Maxwell (1966), the Supreme Court ruled that defendants are entitled to impartial jury trials and that trial judges should take strict measures to uphold the right to a fair trial. Judges interpreted Sheppard as an authorization to impose muzzle decrees on trial participants, but some even began placing them in the media. The Court dispelled the latter notion and set the bar very high for such orders in Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart (1976). This case stemmed from the 1975 trial of Erwin Simants, accused of murdering six people. The district judge issued a gag order prohibiting the media from reporting on Simants` confession, statements he made to others, the content of notes he wrote on the night of the murders, and other potentially damaging information.

The Supreme Court declared the judge`s order invalid and ruled that media gag orders must be a heavy burden and that the courts must firmly demonstrate the need to do so. Instead of issuing muzzle decrees, the courts should consider alternatives. B, such as changing locations, postponing the procedure until public attention subsides, i.e. rigorous (or jury selection procedures) and confiscating jurors. In late 2009, Israel issued a gag order against the Israeli media, which reported the facts surrounding the Anat Kamm-Uri Blau case. The muzzle order was eventually widely criticized and published as the details of the case were reported abroad. The scandal revolved around leaked Israel Defense Forces documents suggesting that the army had committed extrajudicial executions. [14] In a widespread or high-profile case, the court may, at the request of a party or ex officio, make a special order governing matters such as extrajudicial testimony of the parties and witnesses that may affect the accused`s right to a fair trial by an impartial jury, seating and conduct of spectators and representatives of the news media in the courtroom – the administration and seizure of the jurors and witnesses, as well as any other matter that the court deems appropriate to be included in such an order. In such cases, it may be appropriate for the court to consult with representatives of the news media on the adoption of such a special order. In Gentile v. State Bar of Nevada (1991), the Supreme Court ruled that lawyers who make out-of-court statements are not entitled to the same level of protection as the media.

Gag orders to the press are a form of prior restraint and are rarely maintained. The judge can issue a gag order for all parties involved in your case or only for certain parties. Judge can issue gag order for: On November 13, 2013, a muzzle order was issued against a famous Israeli singer suspected of having sex with girls under the age of consent. Although the traditional media did not promote the singer`s name, users of the social media platform like Facebook posted the singer`s name and incriminating photos. On November 20, Eyal Golan issued a press release announcing that he was the alleged singer. [16] In the summer of 2014, WikiLeaks revealed the existence of an Australian gag order issued by the Supreme Court of Victoria on June 19 to block reporting on allegations of corruption involving several international political leaders in the region. [5] [6] In 2017, California enacted the California Electronic Communications Privacy Act, which amended California Penal Code 1546, including Section 1546.2(b)(1), a provision that allows a court to “make an order in certain cases that delays notification and prohibits any party providing information from informing another party.” that an electronic search warrant has been requested by a government agency. [43] Judges issue muzzle orders to ensure a fair trial, facilitate the efficient administration of justice, and prevent adverse information from entering the jury pool ..

. .