- A federal appeals court allowed parts of journalist Bryan Schott's lawsuit against the Utah Legislature to proceed.
- Schott claims his press credential application was denied as retaliation and because of the viewpoints expressed in his coverage.
- The court dismissed some claims but revived viewpoint discrimination claims for reconsideration.
SALT LAKE CITY — A federal appeals court allowed parts of a lawsuit filed by an independent journalist against the Utah Legislature to move forward after a lower court dismissed the case last fall.
The three-judge panel convened by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit said Bryan Schott, an independent journalist and founder of the Utah Political Watch website, "plausibly alleged" the Legislature denied his application for a press credential "because of his news stories' viewpoints."
The opinion, issued Tuesday, upheld the lower court's dismissal of three of Schott's claims but allowed a pair of claims to be considered again by the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah.
"Today's ruling makes clear that, when the government opens its doors to the press, it cannot then pick and choose who gets to walk through those doors based on whether officials like what a journalist writes," said Charles "Chip" Miller, senior attorney for the Institute for Free Speech and lead counsel for Schott. "Utah's Legislature revised its credentialing policy to exclude independent journalists right after a veteran reporter who covered the Capitol for decades and was known for asking tough questions started his own news site. Schott was the only journalist denied credentials."
He added that the court "recognized that this kind of viewpoint-based gatekeeping is exactly what the First Amendment forbids."
"For over 25 years, I've covered the Utah Legislature without anyone questioning whether I was a 'legitimate' journalist," Schott said. "This ruling confirms what I've believed all along: The First Amendment prevents officials from shutting out a reporter simply because they don't like the way he does his job."
Spokespeople for the Legislature did not immediately provide a comment on the ruling.
Schott, a longtime political reporter, initially sued the Legislature early last year, claiming that denying him a press credential violated the First Amendment and was done in retaliation for his coverage of legislative leaders. Schott previously covered the Legislature for the Salt Lake Tribune and launched Utah Political Watch in late 2024 after his employment with the Tribune ended.
He applied for a press credential to cover the 2025 general legislative session but was denied under a policy limiting credentials on "blogs, independent, or other freelance journalists."
Credentials grant professional journalists access to a press room at the Capitol, reserved seating in the House and Senate galleries, and access to press conferences with elected officials.
The lawsuit accused the Legislature and several employees of five counts of infringing upon his First Amendments rights, saying the defendants denied the credentials based on his viewpoints, the content of his reporting and as retaliation for critical coverage. Schott also said the credentialing process is unconstitutional and "vague as to chill protected speech."
Lawyers for the Legislature responded by arguing that legislative sessions are still open to the public and streamed live online, meaning Schott and others not granted credentials could still cover public meetings and discussions on the House and Senate floor.
The appeals court panel ultimately found the district court correctly ruled to dismiss Schott's claims of vagueness, retaliation and prior restraint, but it revived Schott's two other claims of viewpoint discrimination. Those counts will now be reconsidered by the district court.
