Why does the 6th amendment grant the right to a trial that's open to the public?

An open trial protects the defendant's rights and helps the public to see that trials are truly fair. The reasoning is found in the history of the English legal system. Many cases were tried in secret or with carefully selected audiences, so that very few people saw and heard the evidence against a defendant --- if there really was any genuine evidence. It made it easy to abuse the law and convict innocent people for dirty motives. When trials are open to the public, the members of the audience see and hear everything presented in the court. The jury is made up of ordinary people like those in the audience, so it's much more likely that a jury will have the same perceptions as the audience and reach the same conclusion that the audience does. Having an audience of ordinary people means that more people are likely to question wrongdoing in a trial, such as denying a defendant the right to present witnesses or object to evidence or take the stand in his or her own defense.

It is an attempt to ensure the public knows it is fair and just, and not a Kangaroo Court where all sorts of dirty tricks are done to convict an innocent person who may be unpopular or on the supposed "wrong" side of politics.

So that we can all see that trials are conducted fair and square. If it were allowed to be behind closed doors, the government could get away with anything. It could tell the judge what result it wants, be guaranteed to get it, and nobody would know it was fiddled.

There is a nice phrase that "justice must not only be done, it must be SEEN to be done", and that's right. Open it to the public and anyone who wants to can see that everything is working as it should. It's an absolutely vital safeguard. Especially if reporters are there - they can tell the world through the media what's happening.

I'm British and we have no such constitutional right, but nevertheless we keep to the same principle for the same reason. When you're dealing with people's lives and freedoms (because they could end up in prison as a result of this), it is SO important that if someone is found guilty, we can all be satisfied that they really are. We used to have secret trials in the past (tham153 mentioned Star Chamber) but that was centuries ago and no way would that be tolerated now.

Where we don't do this is:

a) in youth courts, where it is probably better for the child to do it in private, and

b) where the trial involves matters of national security, and things could be revealed in evidence that need to stay secret for the good of everyone. But that's incredibly controversial and the prosecution will need to make a solid case for it. So it almost never happens.

To make sure that the system is fair and honest.

Kangaroo courts.

These are faux trials done in secret where the guilty verdict is a foregone conclusion. By making secret trials illegal, the founding fathers were minimizing the opportunities for kangaroo trials where the government finds political opponents guilty.

no kangaroo courts hidden away behind closed doors.

It DOES NOT grant ANY rights. The amendments in the Bill of Rights prohibit the government from VIOLATING rights the language assumes pre-exist the government.

The reason for a public trial is so the government can't HIDE how it conducts trials from the citizens.

So.the government's actions at the trial.can be observed and scrutinized to help ensure the defendent receives a fair trial.

To ensure equity. It is much harder to stack a verdict, or play fast and lose with someone's rights when the public (and media) are allowed to attend. The purpose is to eliminate the possibility of being tried, convicted and sentenced in a kangaroo court.

The public needs to see that justice is done also.