Whether the breach of Judge Walker's binding promise to Petitioners, upon which they reasonably and detrimentally relied, cognizably injures them

QUESTIONS PRESENTED During the trial over the constitutionality of California’s Proposition 8, the presiding judge, the Hon. Vaughn Walker, looked Petitioners’ counsel straight in the eye and promised in open court that the video recording he was making of the trial proceedings over Petitioners’ objections would be used only in chambers and never be made public. Judge Walker made this promise because this Court’s emergency order halting his plan to unlawfully videotape and broadcast the trial compelled him to do so, and Petitioners reasonably and detrimentally relied upon the promise by not seeking, once again, this Court’s intervention to halt the video recording. Following the trial, a Ninth Circuit panel unanimously held that Judge Walker’s promise was legally binding and could not be nullified without grave damage to the basic integrity of the federal judiciary. But in the decisions below, the district court ordered the public release of the trial recordings, and a divided panel of the Ninth Circuit dismissed Petitioners’ appeal of that order for lack of Article III standing. The questions presented are: 1. Whether the breach of Judge Walker’s binding promise to Petitioners, upon which they reasonably and detrimentally relied, cognizably injures them. 2. Whether the video recordings that Judge Walker solemnly promised Petitioners would not be made public may now be ordered publicly released over their objection.