Oct 25, 2024 By Zach Petroff 5 min read

Editor’s note: A photo caption for this story indicated the wrong address for Fayette County’s central court building. The court is located at 148 E. Main St., Uniontown.

For more than four years, Fayette County’s Central Court building in Uniontown has limited when people can enter for some court proceedings, asking them to sign in and wait outside to be called.

Melissa Melewsky, media law attorney for the Pennsylvania NewsMedia Association, said any limits about who can enter a courtroom for a public court proceeding such as preliminary hearings are “blatantly unconstitutional.”

“The Constitutions of the United States and Pennsylvania require courts to be open, and the public has a right to attend any (or all) court proceedings without undue interference,” Melewsky said.

A sign clearly displayed on the front door cited the “corona virus (sic)” as the reason for limited access, and indicated that only “defendants, victims, attorney’s (sic) and necessary court employees” would be permitted inside. The sign was removed Wednesday after Melewsky questioned why it was still up more than three years after the state’s pandemic-related disaster declaration ended.

The issue came to light when a Herald-Standard reporter went to central court for a preliminary hearing Tuesday. He was told he must sign in, provide his phone number, and the make and model of his vehicle so he could be notified when the hearing took place. Since the reporter had walked there from the downtown newsroom he was allowed to wait inside the building until the preliminary hearing was underway and was then escorted into the courtroom.

Fayette County Deputy Court Administrator Lori Lambie called leaving that sign up “an oversight,” but said the policy of requiring visitors to the court to sign in, state why they are there, and potentially wait outside, will remain in place because the central court building is too small.

On behalf of the Herald-Standard, Melewsky contacted the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts, the agency that oversees all of the state’s courts.

Stacey Witalec, a spokeswoman for the AOPC, said the reporter was told to wait outside because the reporter told a security guard he was there for a specific hearing. Those who are there for only one case, Witalec said, will still be asked to wait outside “simply to maximize space in the court area.”

She added, “Should they say they would like to see multiple or all proceedings they can certainly stay.”

Melewsky called the policy of having anyone wait outside “problematic,” and said space issues “don’t override the First Amendment.”

“The onus can’t be on the public to justify their presence, the court must be open to the public,” Melewsky said. “Also, there shouldn’t be a Q&A for folks seeking entrance.”

While screening those who come to a court is necessary for security reasons, the policy essentially requires visitors to explain their purposes for coming to central court, she noted.

“That kind of interrogation, in itself, could deter public access, and it implies court staff can limit access based on the answer,” Melewsky said.

Paula Burke, an attorney for the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press that focuses on government transparency, said anything that could limit public access to an open court proceeding could have “severely damaging consequences.”

“The state and federal constitutions require open court as a bedrock of our democratic system so that we can make sure that people are treated fairly and there are not any mistreatments happening within the courthouse,” Burke said.

Melewsky said it’s up to the county’s court administrator to deal with space constraints. The courtroom has only enough seats in the gallery for seven or eight people from the public, and some of those spaces are occupied by witnesses, attorneys or police officers involved in the case.

On Wednesday, Lambie explained that it’s not unusual for central court to have 45 to 60 cases daily. Allowing everyone inside at once means “we end up going over the allowable capacity under the fire code,” she said.

“We found it easier for the people who are there for a particular case to sign in so we can see if we need to make accommodations,” she said.

Those accommodations could include moving the hearing to the courthouse, which is up the street from the central court building.

Lambie reiterated that no one “has been or would be denied access to the courtroom.”

However, another reporter with the Herald-Standard also was denied total access to the courtroom under similar circumstances in August 2023, and again in June of this year. On Tuesday, a reporter heard a woman being turned away as she tried to go inside the courtroom to support a party involved in a case.

Like Melewsky, Burke also expressed concern about requiring people to sign-in before entering the courtroom, stating the practice of having to register is “troubling and constitutionally infirm.”

“By requiring people to register their attendance or interest in participating — that is limiting access and chilling the public’s ability to observe the working of the courthouse,” she said.

“There is no constitutional rationale that would allow for the registration of your interest observing a court proceeding.”

As for Lambie’s claim the district court’s policy emphasizes security, Burke said it is a moot point.

“Security policies don’t trump the Constitution,” she said.