LAW LIBRARY: Public Means Public: How the U.S. Supreme Court Reaffirmed the Right to Open Courtrooms in Presley v. Georgia

Posted on July 22, 2026

 When criminal defendants go on trial in the United States, the Constitution promises more than just a lawyer and an impartial jury.

It also guarantees that justice will be carried out in public.

********

Public means public: That principle was at the heart of Presley v. Georgia, a landmark 2010 U.S. Supreme Court decision that reinforced the public’s constitutional right to observe criminal proceedings—including jury selection.

Eric Presley was convicted in a Georgia state court in 2003 on drug-related charges. Before his trial began, the judge ordered everyone in the courtroom to leave during jury selection, including Presley’s uncle, who wanted to watch the proceedings.

The judge explained there was limited seating and expressed concern that potential jurors might overhear conversations from spectators. Presley’s attorney immediately objected, arguing that closing the courtroom violated Presley’s constitutional right to a public trial under the Sixth Amendment, a protection applied to state courts through the Fourteenth Amendment.

Photo Courtesy U.S. Supreme Court

The trial judge rejected the objection and proceeded with jury selection behind closed doors. Presley was later convicted and sought a new trial, arguing that the courtroom closure was unconstitutional. Evidence later showed there was sufficient space in the courtroom to accommodate spectators without disrupting jury selection.

Georgia’s appellate courts upheld the conviction. The courts reasoned that Presley had failed to propose alternative arrangements that would have allowed public access while addressing the judge’s concerns. In 2008, the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed the ruling, although two justices dissented, warning that the decision threatened the constitutional guarantee of open courtrooms.

The case eventually reached the U.S. Supreme Court.

American flag, US constitution and a judge's gavel symbolizing the American justice system or the Judicial Branch of government ( Judiciary )In 2010, the Supreme Court reversed Georgia’s decision by a 7-2 vote.

Writing for the majority, the Court held that jury selection is part of a criminal trial and is therefore subject to the Sixth Amendment’s public-trial guarantee.

The justices ruled that trial judges have an affirmative duty to consider reasonable alternatives before excluding the public from the courtroom—even when defense attorneys do not suggest those alternatives.

The Court emphasized that courtroom closures are permitted only under limited circumstances and only after judges make specific findings demonstrating that closure is necessary to protect an overriding interest, such as courtroom safety or ensuring a fair trial. General concerns about space limitations or the possibility that jurors might overhear comments from spectators are not enough by themselves to justify excluding the public.

In reaching its decision, the Court relied on two earlier landmark rulings:

  • Waller v. Georgia (1984), which established strict constitutional standards that courts must satisfy before closing criminal proceedings.
  • Press-Enterprise Co. v. Superior Court (1984), which recognized that jury selection is generally open to the public because transparency promotes confidence in the judicial system.

The Supreme Court sent Presley’s case back to the Georgia courts for further proceedings consistent with its ruling.

The decision reaffirmed a fundamental principle of American justice: courtrooms belong to the public unless a judge can clearly demonstrate that closing them is constitutionally necessary.

Open trials help ensure fairness, discourage abuse, promote public confidence in the judicial system, and allow citizens to observe how justice is administered.

Fact Checklist: Presley v. Georgia (2010)

  • ✅ Eric Presley was convicted in a Georgia state court on drug-related charges.
  • ✅ During jury selection (voir dire), the trial judge ordered the courtroom closed to the public.
  • ✅ Presley’s uncle was excluded from the courtroom during jury selection.
  • ✅ The judge cited limited courtroom space and concern that prospective jurors might overhear comments from spectators as the reasons for the closure.
  • ✅ Presley’s attorney objected, arguing the closure violated the Sixth Amendment right to a public trial.
  • ✅ The Sixth Amendment’s public-trial guarantee applies to state courts through the Fourteenth Amendment.
  • ✅ The trial judge denied the defense’s request to keep the courtroom open.
  • ✅ Presley was convicted after the trial.
  • ✅ Presley sought a new trial, arguing the courtroom closure violated his constitutional rights.
  • ✅ Evidence later showed there was sufficient space to accommodate members of the public during jury selection.
  • ✅ Georgia appellate courts upheld Presley’s conviction.
  • ✅ The Georgia Supreme Court affirmed the conviction in 2008.
  • ✅ Two Georgia Supreme Court justices dissented, warning the decision weakened the constitutional right to open courtrooms.
  • ✅ The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear Presley’s appeal.
  • ✅ In 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the Georgia Supreme Court in a 7-2 decision.
  • ✅ The Supreme Court ruled that jury selection is part of a criminal trial and is protected by the Sixth Amendment’s public-trial guarantee.
  • ✅ The Court held that trial judges have an independent duty to consider reasonable alternatives before closing a courtroom.
  • ✅ Judges must consider alternatives even if the defense does not propose them.
  • ✅ The Court ruled that generalized concerns about courtroom space or jurors overhearing spectators are insufficient to justify closing the courtroom.
  • ✅ Courtroom closures are constitutional only when necessary to protect an overriding interest and when supported by specific findings on the record.

How to Find the Case

Official U.S. Supreme Court Opinion

Presley v. Georgia, 558 U.S. 209 (2010)

Related Supreme Court Cases

These decisions remain the leading Supreme Court precedents establishing that criminal proceedings—including jury selection—are presumptively open to the public and may be closed only in narrowly defined, constitutionally justified circumstances.