The Murdoch family is secretly battling over succession. News outlets are asking a court to make it public

A coalition of media organizations, including CNN, has petitioned a Nevada court to open up the secret proceedings surrounding a legal battle over the future of billionaire Rupert Murdoch’s media empire.

The New York Times, Associated Press, National Public Radio, The Washington Post, Reuters and CNN filed a motion Wednesday in the Second Judicial District Court in Nevada to make public the proceedings, objecting to the case being so extensively sealed that it doesn’t even appear on any court schedule or docket.

The Murdoch family, famous for helming one of the world’s most influential media empires that includes Fox News, The Wall Street Journal and outlets in Australia and the UK, is locked in a secret court battle over succession and control of the future of the family business, according to a New York Times report published in July citing sealed court documents.

According to the report, Murdoch, the 93-year-old patriarch, filed a petition late last year to amend the irrevocable family trust that would have given equal voting shares to Murdoch’s eldest four children. Instead, Murdoch wanted to grant exclusive control to his eldest son and chosen successor Lachlan, according to The Times.

Lachlan, who is more politically aligned with his father’s conservative views than his siblings, took over as chairman of Fox Corporation and News Corporation last September. Citing the court documents, which CNN has not independently seen, the Times reported that Murdoch felt handing Lachlan control of the media businesses he founded would better protect their value following his death by maintaining its right-wing editorial bent.

But the entire process has been completely sealed in Nevada, with even the existence of the proceedings kept in secret.

“Nevada’s courts are accountable to the public, and the public is entitled to know whether the trust at issue is being administered in accordance with the law,” the filing stated. “Certainly, an entire matter cannot be sealed such that its very existence is not a public record, even if all parties to the litigation agree. Rather, the court must apply the presumption of access and make specific findings to underpin any sealing.”

The filing argued that completely sealing the proceedings “meets neither the substantive nor procedural requirements imposed by the constitutional right of access,” and any concerns over privacy could be met with redactions.

According to the Times, the trust only allows changes that are done in good faith with the purpose of benefiting all heirs. A trial to decide whether Murdoch is acting in good faith is expected to begin in September.