Judge Denies Bid to Force Sun Printing

A federal judge declined to mandate that the Las Vegas Review-Journal print the Las Vegas Sun.

Updated on Oct. 24, 2026 in Gambling

Bold flat-color editorial illustration of stacked newsprint cylinders, symbolizing the industrial conflict between two Las Vegas newspapers. — U.S. District Judge Anne Traum denied the Las Vegas Sun's request to force the Las Vegas Review-Journal to resume printing services. AI Illustration. Upload story photo >

Live Poll

Should local newspapers be legally required to maintain shared printing arrangements to support market competition?

U.S. District Judge Anne Traum rejected an emergency request from the Las Vegas Sun to force the Las Vegas Review-Journal to resume printing and distributing its newspaper. The ruling denies the request for an injunction while leaving open the potential for a 1989 joint operating agreement to be revived.

Why it matters

The decision underscores the legal complexities surrounding the Newspaper Preservation Act and the ongoing dispute over joint operating agreements in Las Vegas. Without an emergency order, the case now moves toward a full trial to determine the future of the partnership.

The ruling notes that the court lacks the authority to force the Review-Journal to provide subscriber lists or print the Sun as a daily insert. The legal battle follows a 2025 appellate court decision that voided a subsequent 2005 joint agreement.

The players

Anne Traum

She is a U.S. District Judge presiding over the ongoing legal dispute between the two Las Vegas newspapers.

Las Vegas Sun

This is a Las Vegas-based newspaper that sought a court order to force its distribution through a joint operating agreement.

Las Vegas Review-Journal

This is a major daily newspaper in Las Vegas that is currently in a legal battle regarding its printing and distribution obligations.

The details

Judge Traum found that the Sun failed to demonstrate that the suspension of printing would cause irreparable harm, despite arguments regarding the potential for anti-competitive behavior. The court indicated that the only viable paths forward for the publications are the terms of the 1989 agreement or the dissolution of their joint operations.

1970: The Newspaper Preservation Act authorized joint operating arrangements.
1989: The original joint operating agreement between the newspapers was established.
2005: A pact replacing the 1989 agreement was created.
2025: The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals voided the 2005 agreement.
October 21, 2026: Judge Traum issued the ruling rejecting the emergency printing request.

Culture Shift

The case tests the endurance of the Newspaper Preservation Act, a 1970 law designed to protect local news through shared operations. The current litigation signals a potential end to these traditional joint models in an era where digital distribution is increasingly prioritized.

Residents may see changes in how the Sun is distributed throughout the city as the case proceeds to trial. The lack of an emergency order means the immediate status of print distribution remains uncertain for subscribers.

The takeaway

The court's refusal to grant an emergency order indicates a high bar for proving irreparable harm in business contract disputes. Parties involved in long-standing joint agreements should prepare for extended litigation as courts continue to interpret the validity of historical pacts.