Barry County Judge Says Only One Newspaper Allowed in Courtroom

The Reported Statement

According to the account reported to Clutch Justice, Judge Schipper stated on the record that only the Hastings Banner was allowed access to his courtroom after a journalist submitted a formal media coverage request form. The specific hearing, date, and the identity of the journalist who submitted the request have not been publicly disclosed in connection with this account.

If the statement accurately reflects the judge’s courtroom policy, it describes an access restriction that has no basis in Michigan court rules or First Amendment precedent.

The Open Courts Doctrine

Court proceedings in the United States are presumed open to the public and the press. That presumption is rooted in the First Amendment and has been reinforced by the Supreme Court in cases including Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555 (1980), which established that the right of access to criminal trials is constitutionally protected. The Court subsequently extended that framework to preliminary hearings and other proceedings.

Michigan courts operate under the same principle. A judge retains authority to regulate courtroom order — limiting cameras or recording equipment, managing seating in a capacity-constrained space, setting decorum rules — but that authority does not extend to selecting which press outlets may cover a proceeding. Government officials are not permitted to favor one media outlet over another in providing access to public functions.

The Claims List Entry

Barry County Board of Commissioners claims records show the Trial Court Criminal and Civil account paying for a one-year Hastings Banner subscription with a line reference to Schipper. The payment is modest. Local governments and courts routinely subscribe to local newspapers for legal notice publications and general reference purposes, and the subscription alone does not indicate a preference or relationship beyond that routine practice.

Barry County Board of Commissioners claims list, March 2, 2026 meeting. The Trial Court Criminal and Civil account line shows a Hastings Banner subscription with a reference to Schipper. Source: Barry County Board of Commissioners meeting records.

Paired with the reported courtroom statement, the claims list entry adds context. The question it raises is whether one publication is receiving preferential treatment in this courtroom — not through the subscription itself, which is unremarkable in isolation, but through the combination of a routine financial relationship and an access restriction that, if accurate, would have no lawful basis.

Why This Matters

Court proceedings are public institutions. The open courts principle exists not merely as a press right but as a structural protection for defendants, litigants, and the public — all of whom have an interest in proceedings that are visible and subject to independent reporting. When access is restricted to a single outlet, whether formally or informally, it narrows the independent record of what occurs in that courtroom.

The documented record here — a reported on-the-record statement and a claims list entry — is sufficient to warrant clarification from court administrators about how press access is being handled in Barry County’s 56th Circuit Court. The transcript of the hearing in which the statement was reportedly made would resolve the central factual question.