Nevada Supreme Court Rebukes Judge

The Nevada Supreme Court has ordered a Las Vegas district judge to reinstate three journalists she barred from her courtroom, ruling that her actions violated the First Amendment.

In a decision issued Wednesday, the state’s high court found that Clark County District Judge Jessica Peterson improperly excluded reporters from the Las Vegas Review-Journal during a high-profile sexual assault trial after they refused to agree to restrictions on what they could publish.

Peterson removed reporters Noble Brigham, Akiya Dillon, and Bizuayehu Tesfaye from the courtroom on Jan. 21 while presiding over the trial of Nathan Chasing Horse, a former actor who appeared in Dances with Wolves and is facing multiple sexual assault charges. Peterson demanded that media outlets obtain court permission before publishing any “personal information” about victims, witnesses, or jurors.

When the reporters declined to agree to those conditions, Peterson ordered them out, stating that access to her courtroom was a “privilege” rather than a right.

The Review-Journal challenged the order in court on Tuesday. One day later, Chief Justice Douglas Herndon and Justices Elissa Cadish and Lidia Stiglich ruled unanimously that Peterson had overstepped her authority.

“Petitioners argue that the district court manifestly abused its discretion in several respects, including by issuing an unconstitutional restraint and violating its right of access to the court,” the justices wrote. “We agree.”

The Supreme Court said Peterson’s actions constituted a “prior restraint,” a legal term describing government efforts to restrict speech before it occurs, one of the most serious violations of constitutional free speech protections. The justices stated that the Sixth Amendment guarantees criminal defendants a public trial and also protects the public’s right to observe court proceedings.

The justices also noted that the alleged victim’s name had already appeared in public court filings and mentioned during testimony.

“Although we are sympathetic to the alleged victim’s privacy concerns, the prior disclosure of her name diminishes any interest in protecting her anonymity,” the ruling stated.

The court also criticized Peterson for applying her restrictions inconsistently, as a television journalist, and other members of the public were allowed to remain in the courtroom during testimony. The inconsistency, the justices said, undermined the claim that the order was necessary to protect privacy.

The Supreme Court ordered Peterson to immediately stop excluding reporters and to vacate her directive attempting to control what the newspaper could publish. The court also said it plans to issue a more detailed written opinion, noting that the constitutional issues raised have implications for courts across Nevada.

Peterson has served on the bench since 2020.