Utah journalist sues after legislative officials deny Capitol credentials to independent media

SALT LAKE CITY — An independent Utah journalist filed a lawsuit in federal court Wednesday against Utah legislative officials, which argues that blocking him from a Capitol building media credential violates his free speech rights. The lawsuit, filed by Bryan Schott in partnership with the Institute for Free Speech, also says the decision blocks all independent media, blogs and freelancers from covering the 2025 legislative session, which began Tuesday. Schott most recently worked as a political correspondent for the Salt Lake Tribune until August 2024. According to the lawsuit, Schott said he has been reporting in Utah for 25 years — including at KUER and KSL NewsRadio. Schott decided to venture off and begin his own news source, Utah Political Watch, for which he is now the founder, managing editor and sole reporter. He said he first "reached out" to the legislature about press credentials to the Capitol building on Nov. 5, 2024. "Yet despite his decades covering Utah politics, and having previously received press credentials to the media-designated areas within the Utah Legislature every year since the credentialing policy was established in 2013, Bryan Schott has been denied credentials for the 2025 Utah Legislative Session," the lawsuit states. The suit names the communications staff for the Utah House of Representatives and Senate, House Communications Director Alexa Musselman, Senate Deputy Chief of Staff and Media Liaison Designee Aundrea Peterson, House Chief of Staff Abby Osborne and Senate Chief of Staff Mark Thomas. According to the lawsuit, the Utah Capitol Media Access and Credentialing Policy was updated after Schott inquired about gaining media access. Internet archives show the Capitol media access webpage was updated on Dec. 18, 2024, which was the day after Schott officially submitted a request for press credentials, according to the lawsuit. "The metadata for the revised media credential policy says the document was created on Nov. 24, 2024, which was after I first started asking about credentialing," Schott said. "I repeatedly asked for a copy of the previous policy, but was ignored. I had to resort to an open records request to obtain a copy." The old copy was exhibited in the lawsuit, and it makes no mention of independent media, blogs or freelance media.

Code of ethics for legislative access

The two documents do align on other criteria required to obtain a media pass, though. Namely, the requirement to "adhere to a professional code of ethics," according to both documents. In the middle of Schott's dispute with the legislature on the media pass in December, he published an unrelated article that was scrutinized by its subject, Senate President Stuart Adams for Schott's failure to "include information from the lieutenant governor's office or those named in the story before publishing the blog." While Adams did not elaborate further, he said it was not the first time the failure had occurred. Part of Adams' point was also mentioned verbatim in a text conversation included in the lawsuit, when Schott sent a request for comment to Peterson. In the text, she told him he published too quickly and didn't allow adequate time for a response. "Sending a request for comment and immediately publishing the story is not only irresponsible but also reflects a disregard for accurate reporting and ethical standards," she wrote in the text to Schott. "Your story is not only misleading; it is factually inaccurate." In the same text conversation, Schott mentioned the press credential issue. "It certainly sounds like you're going to use your criticism of this story you don't like to deny me a press credential next week," he wrote. Ultimately, the lawsuit argues the Capitol media pass revisions were made likely with the intent "to target Schott, making the policy change and the subsequent denial of access to him both speaker and viewpoint based."

$17.91 in damages

Schott said he upholds "the highest ethical standards," and argued that the "professional code of ethics" required by the legislature doesn't provide specifics. "The policy doesn't say those mean — what is a blog? What is their definition of independent media? What code of ethics are we supposed to follow?" he said, in a recorded video. "This lawsuit claims that these rules are overly arbitrary, there's no way for me to know what I have to change in order to comply with them and it just allows them to pick and choose who gets to cover the legislature." Further, Schott's lawsuit argues the First Amendment doesn't make a "distinction between institutional press and other reporters, such as those who work for independent news websites to blogs." In the end, Schott said he is requesting to be paid $17.91 for damages made to him, "because 1791 is the year the First Amendment was ratified," he said in a social post. "The very amendment tattooed on my arm as a daily reminder of why I do this work." The House of Representatives and Utah Senate declined to comment on this story when asked by KSL TV, due to the active lawsuit.

Related topics