Community · Valley-wide
Federal judge rejects Las Vegas Sun's emergency bid to make the Review-Journal resume printing, but lets its claims go to trial
U.S. District Judge Anne Traum denied the Sun's emergency request, saying most of the relief it sought was unlawful, while signaling the Sun may be able to show a 1989 agreement is still valid and enforceable.
Listen to this brief · 4 min
Read aloud by an AI voice from the text below. Download MP3
What happened
A federal judge on Wednesday turned down a request from the Las Vegas Sun to force the Las Vegas Review-Journal to start printing and distributing the Sun again on an emergency basis. The Review-Journal, which is a party to the case, reported on the ruling by U.S. District Judge Anne Traum.
"Most of the relief that the Sun seeks is unlawful," Traum wrote, according to the Review-Journal. The ruling is the latest step in more than seven years of litigation between the two newspapers, which the Sun started.
What the judge decided
No emergency return to print
The Sun asked the court to require the Review-Journal to again carry the Sun as an insert every day. Traum said the Sun's options at this point are limited to weekday afternoon distribution under a 1989 joint operating agreement or no joint operation at all. She rejected the Sun's argument that she could order printing and delivery in some other form, and she also declined to order immediate distribution under the 1989 agreement.
Traum found the Sun would face severe obstacles printing its paper without a joint operating agreement, but said it had not shown that harm would be irreparable. She also cited evidence from the Review-Journal that printing the Sun as an afternoon paper would significantly hurt its finances, which she described as already on shaky ground, like those of many local newspapers.
The 1989 agreement remains in play
The Review-Journal has argued that the 1989 agreement was replaced by a 2005 pact. Under that 2005 deal, the Review-Journal printed the Sun and delivered it each morning as an insert, but the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals voided it last year, the Review-Journal reported.
Traum declined, at this stage, to rule that the 1989 arrangement cannot be revived. She wrote that the Sun would be "likely to show" that the 1989 agreement "is the present valid and enforceable agreement between the parties." That agreement would require the Review-Journal to print and deliver the Sun as a weekday afternoon paper and as part of its weekend and holiday editions.
Antitrust claims
The judge also said the Sun could likely show that the Review-Journal gained or kept monopoly power through anti-competitive conduct. Those claims will now move toward trial.
How the two sides responded
Sun attorney Kristen Martini presented the ruling as a win. "The Court's Order confirms that the Sun's claims will proceed to trial," she said in a statement, adding the Sun had hoped to be back in daily print by now.
On the Review-Journal side, Lipman said the paper "looks forward to resolving the remainder of this case and is confident it will continue to prevail," according to the Review-Journal's report.
Background on joint operating agreements
Joint operating arrangements were allowed under the 1970 Newspaper Preservation Act to help keep competing newspapers with different editorial viewpoints alive. The Review-Journal noted they were once common in cities around the country, and the Las Vegas agreement was the last one of its kind.
Afternoon newspapers have also largely disappeared. According to the Review-Journal, the last U.S. metro daily afternoon paper closed more than a decade ago. Readers can find more local coverage in our community section.
What to watch next
- The Sun's claims, including its antitrust allegations, are set to proceed to trial.
- Whether the court ultimately finds the 1989 joint operating agreement is the valid, enforceable agreement between the papers.
- The Review-Journal's argument that the 1989 agreement cannot be revived, which the judge declined to accept at this stage.
