A Utah judge on Friday rejected a defense motion to bar cameras from the courtroom where Tyler Robinson will be tried on charges that he killed conservative activist Charlie Kirk, ruling that allowing the public to see proceedings through electronic media serves a greater interest than shielding the defendant from potentially biased coverage. Third District Judge Tony Graf said that while some news outlets have used footage from earlier hearings to opine on evidence not yet presented and to “generally vilify the defendant,” he would not impose a blanket prohibition on cameras.
“Electronic media coverage provides a means to facilitate the public’s right of access to court proceedings for those who cannot physically occupy the limited space available in a courtroom,” Graf said in a videoconference ruling. “Livestreaming in particular allows as many people as are interested to observe the justice system at work and hold our branches of government accountable.”
Robinson’s attorneys had argued that live broadcasts and still photographs were fueling online commentary and news stories that painted their client as unremorseful because of how he appears and acts during hearings. They contended that the coverage risked tainting potential jurors and undermining Robinson’s right to a fair trial. Graf acknowledged the concern but noted that restricting cameras would not stop the spread of misinformation outside court — a reality he cannot control — and that he would continue to evaluate coverage requests individually.
Media organizations, prosecutors, and Kirk’s widow, Erika Kirk, all urged the judge to keep the courtroom open to cameras. In court papers, they argued that transparency is the most effective way to counter the conspiracy theories that have circulated since Sept. 10, when Kirk, 31, was shot in the neck while speaking at Utah Valley University in Orem. Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA, had become an influential force on the right and was considered instrumental in President Donald Trump’s return to office.
The Sept. 10 killing and the political profile of the victim have amplified public interest in Robinson’s prosecution, elevating the long-running dispute over cameras in major criminal cases. The stakes are particularly high because prosecutors intend to seek the death penalty — a punishment in which a jury may weigh the defendant’s character — and defense attorneys are concerned that images of Robinson appearing to smirk or confer with counsel could influence that judgment. In December, footage of Robinson chatting with his lawyers during a hearing drew on-air comments on Fox News that he treated Kirk “like a trophy.”
Graf has already taken steps to protect Robinson’s rights during pretrial proceedings. After members of a media pool violated a courtroom order by showing Robinson’s shackles and capturing close-ups of him speaking with his attorneys, the judge tightened the rules and moved all cameras to the back of the room, making it harder to obtain clear images of the defendant. He also granted a defense request to push back Robinson’s preliminary hearing, now scheduled for July 6 through 10, to allow time for the parties to argue over evidence. During that hearing, prosecutors must demonstrate they have enough proof for the case to move toward trial.
Authorities have said that DNA consistent with Robinson’s profile was found on the trigger of the rifle used to kill Kirk, on the fired cartridge casing, on two unfired cartridges, and on a towel that was wrapped around the weapon. Prosecutors also cite surveillance video and a handwritten note that Robinson allegedly left for a romantic partner, in which they say he confessed to the crime. Robinson’s lawyers, however, have demanded more detail from federal law enforcement agencies about how the DNA analysis was conducted before the preliminary hearing proceeds.
Robinson, 23, has not yet entered a plea. He faces charges that include aggravated murder.
The judge’s ruling continues a long pattern in American courts in which cameras, though generally barred from federal criminal trials, have become increasingly common in state proceedings. Notable exceptions include former President Trump’s trial and conviction on state charges in New York, where courtroom audio and video were prohibited by law and media organizations relied on sketch artists. Judges typically retain broad discretion over which portions of a case may be broadcast and who may be filmed.
Graf said that the rights of the press and the public do not disappear in high-profile cases and that his order respects both the defendant’s entitlements and the widow’s right to a speedy resolution. He set the July hearing window to strike that balance. Neither the defense nor the prosecution immediately responded to requests for comment after the ruling was delivered by video call.