They argued that unsealing the videos would endanger pro-Prop. 8 witnesses and provide "little public benefit," because the trial was held in open court and transcripts are available. But their adversaries said there's no good reason to hide a completed trial from public view.

"What transpires in the courtroom is public property," lawyers for same-sex couples said, quoting a 1947 U.S. Supreme Court ruling. They contended that Prop. 8's sponsors were using unsubstantiated claims of witness intimidation to mask their "true concern that the public will see for itself the utter lack of evidence or persuasive argument" in their case.