Skip to main content /LAW /LAW

find law dictionary

U.S. wants McVeigh webcast lawsuit dismissed

Internet company says ban on televising McVeigh's execution is unconstitutional.  

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Justice Department has asked a federal court in Indiana to throw out a lawsuit by a company seeking to webcast the Timothy McVeigh execution, saying there is no First Amendment right to do so.

Entertainment Network Inc., a Florida-based Internet company, filed the suit last week seeking to place on the Internet a live webcast of the execution. ENI had asked the government either to allow ENI to do its own live coverage or to provide ENI a feed of the execution that ENI could send out live.

graphic ALSO
Ashcroft says McVeigh has exhausted appeals
Officials offer script of McVeigh's final hours
Gary Tuchman: Intense security planned for McVeigh execution
Feds aim to protect McVeigh feed from hackers
McVeigh 'pleased' yet 'disappointed' with book
Lou Michel and Dan Herbeck chat about their book, "American Terrorist: Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma City Bombing."
graphic VIDEO
The Attorney General and Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons announce the closed-circuit transmission and the execution plan

Play video
(QuickTime, Real or Windows Media)

The mother of one bombing victim says she needs to see McVeigh's execution. CNN's Susan Candiotti talks with her

Play video
(QuickTime, Real or Windows Media)
• Newsmaker Profiles: Timothy McVeigh
Read Timothy McVeigh's agreement with the Coroner of Vigo County, Indiana - March 9, 2001 (FindLaw) (PDF format)*
Entertainment Network, Inc. v. Lappin

Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Injunction
Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief
Memorandum in Support of Motion

Documents in PDF format require Adobe Acrobat Reader for viewing.

Latest Legal News

Law Library

FindLaw Consumer Center

The firm named Harley Lappin, warden of the federal penitentiary in Terre Haute, Indiana, Bureau of Prisons Director Kathleen Hawk Sawyer, and Attorney General John Ashcroft as defendants.

"The sole issue is whether the media, or any segment thereof, has the First Amendment right to visually record the execution and broadcast it (either live or via delayed broadcast)," the government said in its response. "The answer to this question is simply that no such constitutional right has been established nor does such right exist."

The Justice Department cited a 1977 case in which a federal court in Texas found a news cameraman had no right to film a state execution. In that case the appeals court said the First Amendment "does not extend to matters not accessible to the public generally, such as filming of executions in Texas state prison."

The Terre Haute prison warden said there are four reasons for the federal regulation that says "no photographic or other visual or audio recording of the execution shall be permitted": preventing the sensationalizing of executions, preserving the solemnity of executions, maintaining security and order in the prison system, and protecting the privacy rights of the condemned person, the victims, their families, and those who carry out the execution.

Lappin said that if prison inmates were to see the execution on television or learn about the broadcast, it could lead to a prison disturbance.

"The inmates may well see the execution as 'sport,' which dehumanizes them. When inmates feel that they are dehumanized or devalued as persons, agitation amongst the inmates is frequently fomented [which] can lead to prison disturbances," he said.

In his declaration to the court, the warden also said a public broadcast would violate the privacy of the condemned person, would strip the dignity from other death row inmates, would strip away privacy and dignity from victims and the families, and would "seriously put at risk the safety of those charged with implementing the sentence of death."

Ashcroft OKs closed TV feed of McVeigh execution
April 11, 2001
Ashcroft discusses McVeigh execution plan
April 10, 2001
FBI: McVeigh knew children would be killed in OKC blast
March 29, 2001
McVeigh autopsy deal says no 'invasive procedure'
March 19, 2001
Terrorism changes mind of death penalty opponents
March 6, 2001
McVeigh's attorney: 'I'm extremely disappointed'
February 16, 2001
Timothy McVeigh clemency deadline Thursday
February 12, 2001
McVeigh scheduled to die by lethal injection May 16
January 16, 2001
Judge says McVeigh can drop appeals
December 28, 2000
Roger Cossack on McVeigh request to end death penalty appeals
December 28, 2000
Oklahoma City bombing victims remembered, 5 years later
April 19, 2000
McVeigh: Gulf War killings led him on path to disillusionment
March 13, 2000
Grand jury finds McVeigh, Nichols acted alone in Oklahoma bombing
December 30, 1998
Oklahoma City bombing trial
March 1997
Timothy McVeigh and the death penalty
December 1996
McVeigh, Nichols plead not guilty in bombing
August 13, 1996

Federal Bureau of Investigation
U.S. Department of Justice
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms
Oklahoma State Government
Death Penalty Information Center
U.S. Federal Bureau of Prisons

Note: Pages will open in a new browser window
External sites are not endorsed by CNN Interactive.



4:30pm ET, 4/16

Back to the top