A federal judge ordered the Los Angeles Times to remove information from an article that described a plea agreement between prosecutors and a Glendale, Ca., police detective accused of working with the Mexican Mafia, a move the newspaper called highly unusual and unconstitutional, the Times reports. The agreement was supposed to have been under seal, but it was mistakenly made available on PACER, a public database for federal court documents. In response to the order from U.S. District Judge John Walter, the Times revised the article to eliminate information about the sealed document. The newspaper intends to contest the order. “We believe that once material is in the public record, it is proper and appropriate to publish it if it is newsworthy,” said executive editor Norman Pearlstine.
Times attorney Kelli Sager said the First Amendment includes a strong presumption against government actions that prevent someone from speaking or publishing information. The article was posted Saturday before the judge made his ruling. “Typically, courts take into account if information was already published. Where it is no longer secret, the point of the restraining order is mooted,” Sager said. “To order a publication to claw it back doesn’t even serve the interest that may be intended.” Judge Walter did not explain the justification for demanding that the Times withdraw the article. The detective, John Saro Balian, pleaded guilty on July 12 to lying to federal investigators about his links to organized crime, accepting a bribe, and obstructing justice by tipping off a top criminal target about a planned federal raid. The judge may lack jurisdiction to order the Times to do anything, because the newspaper is not a party to the case and did not appear in his courtroom, said Peter Scheer, former director of the First Amendment Coalition.