The Murdoch clan is engaged in a clandestine dispute over inheritance in a secluded Nevada judicial setting.
In the heart of a secluded Reno, Nevada, courtroom, a family feud, reminiscent of a high-stakes episode from the HBO series "Succession," is unfolding without public scrutiny or broadcast. This secretive dispute, involving the prominent Murdoch family, is not destined for television viewers or print media.
The principal catalyst is the elder patriarch's late-year petition to the court, aiming to alter the family trust. Initially, the trust would have distributed equal voting shares upon his demise to his eldest four children: Lachlan, James, Elisabeth, and Prudence. However, Murdoch is now advocating for sole control to be granted to Lachlan, his eldest son and favored successor.
Lachlan, a strong advocate for his father's conservative political beliefs, has assumed roles as chairman of Fox Corporation and News Corporation since September, following his father's retirement. As per Court records, not independently verified by CNN, Murdoch pursued limiting control of his media enterprises to Lachlan posthumously, believing that this would shield their monetary worth while retaining a right-wing editorial stance.
The forthcoming trial will decide the inheritor of Murdoch's vast right-wing media empire, encompassing prominent entities like Fox News and its lucrative flagship, Fox News. The potential outcome may lead to a shift in the media empire's political bias, should Lachlan's siblings be able to seize control. Last week, James Murdoch, who departed News Corp. in 2020, endorsed Kamala Harris for presidency, expressing support for her election as essential for the continued strength and stability of the democracy and economy.
Murdoch's representatives declined comment or did not respond to CNN's requests regarding this story. Communications from Prudence Murdoch, the eldest daughter, could not be obtained.
Meanwhile, the Murdoch family is united in maintaining the private nature of their dispute, despite disagreements over their international media conglomerate, which extends to The Wall Street Journal, New York Post, and Australian and British television and print outlets.
The existence of the trial was first disclosed in a report by The New York Times in July, referencing sealed court documents.
A journey into the Nevada desert
Despite their minimal connection to Nevada, the Murdoch family conflict is being waged covertly in a Washoe County courtroom. Nevada provides one of the most private settings for trust matters, enabling cases to remain concealed to an extreme degree, even to the point of not appearing in public court dockets.
Alex Falconi, founder of Our Nevada Judges, a non-profit watchdog organization focusing on judges' decisions and court proceedings, discussed Nevada's sealing approach. He has worked on numerous cases seeking to unveil sealed court proceedings in the state, alongside the American Civil Liberties Union. Falconi expressed concerns about the potential for unusual due process issues due to the extreme sealing measures taken in Nevada.
“If we don’t know your justification for sealing, how can we know where to file if the entire case number is sealed? How can we know who to serve if we don’t know the attorneys' details?” Falconi remarked.
Recently, the Second Judicial District Court in Nevada recognized the high interest in the Murdoch case and posted a general docket information page, which described it as "The Matter of the Doe 1 Trust, PR23-00813." Falconi was surprised by the move to make the schedule public; however, most other case-related information remains concealed.
Petitions for public disclosure
Last week, a media coalition, representing seven national news organizations including CNN, The New York Times, National Public Radio, and others, filed a petition to unseal the proceedings. The coalition argued that the intense secrecy is unconstitutional and asserts that a decision in the case would have significant consequences across the political landscape.
The coalition stated, "Nevada's courts are responsible to the public, and the public has a right to know whether the trust under dispute is being managed lawfully." They argued that sealing the entire matter is not permissible, even when all parties consent to sealing. Instead, the court should prioritize public access and provide specific justifications for any sealing.
Falconi also sought permission to film court proceedings. However, his request was denied, and he has now appealed that decision.
Last year, Falconi successfully petitioned the Nevada Supreme Court, which ruled that the public holds a constitutional right to access Family Court cases. Murdoch's attorneys contend that this ruling does not apply to their trust case, which they view as private affairs rooted deeply in equity.
Falconi suspects that the judge may dismiss the transparency petitions, which might themselves be subject to sealing. One Murdoch family member, designated in court filings only as "Doe," argued against the media petition, arguing that unsealing the proceedings would reveal "confidential information into the internal workings of their competitors." Additionally, they claimed that the public should not have access to hearings due to safety concerns, citing the requirement for Rupert Murdoch's round-the-clock security.
"The establishment media—including the Proposed Intervenors—who have portrayed Fox and News as threats to American democracy and enemies to be opposed, now question sealing justifications based on safety concerns," Murdoch's attorneys wrote in a court filing.
With the tribunal set to conduct fact-finding sessions in the upcoming week, there's a possibility that the court could make a decision regarding media coverage at any moment.
Should the judge grant the unveiling of the case, it could trigger significant repercussions in Nevada's family court system. However, not everyone is advocating for the uncovering of these cases. Some contend that sealing family court proceedings aids in safeguarding the privacy of the fragile. Falconi, among others promoting transparent courtrooms, proposes that cases can be confined on a case-by-case basis, or specific details can be concealed or blurred.
Falconi isn't affiliated with the media alliance, but he hopes the extensive media coverage surrounding the Murdoch case will inadvertently assist his cause.
"When all of you with your mainstream reports surface, it's proving beneficial, as they're beginning to understand that this isn't standard procedure," Falconi expressed. "They're starting to grasp that we're peculiar, and it'll spur them to rectify the situation."
The ongoing business dispute within the Murdoch family, centered around the control of their vast media empire, has led a coalition of seven national news organizations to file a petition for public disclosure, arguing that the extreme secrecy surrounding the case is unconstitutional and could have significant consequences. Alex Falconi, founder of Our Nevada Judges, has also sought permission to film court proceedings, citing the public's right to access family court cases, despite his request being denied and subsequent appeal.
