If a judge in a different country issues an order preventing the media from discussing a trial, do media outlets in the US have a duty to abide by that order? Or is there a larger duty to keep the public informed? This isn’t a hypothetical example. An Australian court just found Cardinal George Pell, at one time the #3 official in the Vatican and a former Archbishop of Sydney, guilty of sexual abuse of two choirboys in the 1990s. But news outlets in that country couldn’t report the conviction because of what is known as a “suppression order,” which bans any mention of Pell’s name or the details of the case. The Melbourne Herald Sun ran a front page with the word “Censored!” in large type on the day after the conviction was handed down.
https://www.cjr.org/the_new_gatekeepers/australian-sexual-abuse-gag-order.php
https://www.cjr.org/the_new_gatekeepers/australian-sexual-abuse-gag-order.php
