## Facts

- California prison officials at San Quentin implemented Institutional Procedure 770 for lethal-injection executions.
- Procedure 770 kept a curtain closed over the execution-chamber viewing window during preparatory steps (including securing the condemned person to the gurney and inserting intravenous lines).
- Witnesses (public and media) could view the execution only after the preparation was complete and the execution team had left the chamber, leaving only the drug administration visible.
- Press organizations that regularly witnessed executions challenged the policy as a departure from historical public access to the entire execution process.
- The prison justified the restriction primarily as necessary to protect execution-team members’ anonymity and safety.
- The district court permanently enjoined enforcement of the curtain-closure policy after finding it violated the First Amendment; prison officials appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the First Amendment provides a qualified right of public and press access to view an execution from the time the condemned person enters the execution chamber through completion of the execution.
2. Whether Procedure 770’s restriction on viewing the pre-injection stages was a reasonable prison regulation justified by security concerns, or an exaggerated response that unconstitutionally burdened First Amendment access.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit affirmed the permanent injunction.
- The court held the First Amendment grants the public and press a qualified right to view executions from the moment the condemned person is escorted into the chamber through the pronouncement of death.
- The court held Procedure 770’s curtain-closure rule was an exaggerated and unreasonable restriction on that right.
- The court concluded the asserted risks to staff anonymity and safety were speculative and not supported by evidence.
- The court found less restrictive alternatives were readily available (e.g., concealing staff identities with masks or similar attire) that would protect anonymity while permitting full viewing.

## Legal Principles

- The First Amendment may confer a qualified right of access to governmental proceedings when (1) the process has a tradition of openness and (2) public access plays a significant positive role in the process’s functioning.
- Executions fall within this access framework because historical practice favored public observation and public viewing serves oversight and informed debate concerning capital punishment.
- The scope of access includes critical preparatory steps in the execution chamber when those steps are part of the state’s implementation of the death sentence and materially affect the public’s ability to assess how the execution is carried out.
- Prison regulations burdening First Amendment access must be reasonably related to legitimate penological interests and must not be broader than necessary; courts may invalidate regulations that are exaggerated responses where obvious less restrictive alternatives exist.
- Deference to prison administrators does not permit restrictions on constitutional rights based on conjecture without adequate support.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit held that California’s policy of blocking witnesses’ view of the pre-injection stages of lethal injection violated the First Amendment because the public and press have a qualified right to observe the execution process from the condemned person’s entry into the chamber until death is pronounced, and the curtain-closure rule was overbroad in light of speculative safety concerns and available alternatives.


Cal. First Amend. Coal. v. Woodford, 299 F.3d 868 (9th Cir. 2002)