Are gag order appropriate

Answer 1

If you are referring to an order against the publication of court proceedings, in the U.S. they would be usually considered a prior restraint and hence unconstitutional. In the U.S., courtroom proceedings can be closed to the public, only being witnessed by a courtroom illustrator, but this does not constitute a gag order. Publication of such information by persons other than jurors or attorneys who are allowed to be present could not be considered as having been done in contempt of court since the bailiff in control of the courtroom obviously has control over who the judge wants present in or absent from the courtroom.

In Canada, they are used, but they can be and often are circumvented by having the relevant information published across the border in U.S. newspapers and internet sites, etc. Usually a Canadian court will use them when the defendant is an infant below the age of majority or the information is evidence that could prejudice the interests of the defendant or are simply considered too controversial and inflammatory. These orders always expire on their own, however.

Answer 2

If you are referring to an order against the publication of court proceedings, in the U.S. they would be usually considered a prior restraint and hence unconstitutional. In the U.S., courtroom proceedings can be closed to the public, only being witnessed by a courtroom illustrator, but this does not constitute a gag order. Publication of such information by persons other than jurors or attorneys who are allowed to be present could not be considered as having been done in contempt of court since the bailiff in control of the courtroom obviously has control over who the judge wants present in or absent from the courtroom.

In Canada, they are used, but they can be and often are circumvented by having the relevant information published across the border in U.S. newspapers and internet sites, etc. Usually a Canadian court will use them when the defendant is an infant below the age of majority or the information is evidence that could prejudice the interests of the defendant or are simply considered too controversial and inflammatory. These orders always expire on their own, however.