The short version
- Judge Kimya Holmes filed a criminal complaint against WWL-TV for reporting on a donated home, despite the relevant law being repealed in August.
- The station complied with requests to blur sensitive details but refused to identify the source who photographed a vehicle linked to Holmes’ former fiancé.
- Legal experts describe the complaint as having no legal force, citing constitutional protections and the invalidity of the cited statute.
A New Orleans state court judge has filed a criminal complaint against a local CBS affiliate, alleging that the station violated privacy laws by reporting on a real estate transaction involving her former fiancé. The move by Judge Kimya Holmes marks a significant escalation in ongoing tensions between Louisiana’s judicial branch and local news organizations, particularly because the statute she invoked was repealed months before the report aired.
The controversy centers on an investigative segment published by WWL-TV on August 24, which examined how Holmes received a $765,000 home as a gift from Arthur Allen, her then-fiancé. At the time of the donation in 2025, Allen was facing criminal charges for fraudulently collecting more than $712,000 in taxpayer-funded pandemic relief funds. The report detailed how Holmes continued to reside in the property while Allen maintained the mortgage payments, a situation that drew public scrutiny as she prepared for a competitive re-election race scheduled for November 3.
Following the broadcast, Robert Kazik, the judicial administrator for the New Orleans criminal courthouse, sent a letter to WWL-TV on September 10. The correspondence demanded the removal of a public record displaying the address of the donated home and requested that the station reveal the identity of the individual who photographed a Corvette leased by Allen while it was parked in the courthouse garage. Kazik’s letter cited a Louisiana law that purportedly required third parties, including media outlets, to unpublish certain personal information about judges within three days of a request.
However, the legal basis for Kazik’s demands appears to be nonexistent. The Louisiana legislature repealed the specific provisions requiring news outlets to remove published information and criminalizing non-compliance on August 1. This repeal took effect before Hammer’s story was published and well before the judicial administrator issued his letter. Consequently, the misdemeanor penalties cited in the correspondence, which included up to 90 days in prison and a $1,000 fine, no longer carried legal weight at the time of the alleged violation.
In response to the administrator’s letter, WWL-TV took videos containing the disputed information offline on the morning of September 11. The station later reposted the content with the home address and license plate numbers blurred. Despite this partial compliance, the outlet refused to disclose the identity of the source who captured images of the vehicle. Holmes subsequently filed a criminal complaint with the New Orleans Police Department on September 11, accusing the station of revealing her home address and vehicle information.
Scott Sternberg, a media lawyer in New Orleans who lobbied for the repeal of the contested law, stated that the complaint lacks any legal force. He described the repealed provisions as wildly unconstitutional, emphasizing that press freedom is a fundamental right in the United States. Sternberg noted that he could not imagine a public official filing a criminal complaint in response to reporting that appears accurate, particularly when the subject matter involves a real estate transaction.
The accuracy of the WWL-TV report has not been challenged by Holmes or her representatives. In interviews with reporter David Hammer, Holmes maintained that she did not begin dating Allen until four years after he committed the fraud for which he was charged. She also asserted that she was unaware of his criminal charges until shortly before he pleaded guilty in April, by which time their relationship had ended. These claims were presented as context within the investigative segment rather than as defenses against the allegations of privacy violation.
This incident is part of a broader pattern of conflict between Louisiana journalists and state court officials. In early July, deputies at the New Orleans criminal courthouse handcuffed a WWL-TV producer and an attorney for the station while they covered an indictment against the state’s attorney general, which was later dismissed. Additionally, in August, a state court jury awarded $300,000 to Louisiana Supreme Court Justice Jeff Hughes in a libel suit against The Advocate newspaper over an editorial.
Press freedom advocates have expressed concern that these developments could weaken the actual malice standard, a legal principle that has long protected media outlets from defamation suits unless they publish with knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth. The outcome of the Hughes case and the current complaint against WWL-TV may signal a shift in how judicial figures pursue legal remedies against critical reporting.
As of now, the New Orleans Police Department has not taken action on Holmes’ complaint. Sternberg suggested that law enforcement is likely aware that no crime was committed given the repeal of the underlying statute. The situation remains unresolved, with Holmes facing her re-election campaign and WWL-TV continuing to navigate the legal and ethical complexities of reporting on judicial conduct in a climate of increasing hostility toward investigative journalism.
Sources behind this briefing
Go to the original reporting
- The Guardian US↗New Orleans judge files criminal case against CBS affiliate over reporting
