FILE - Rupert Murdoch, center, and his wife Elena Zhukova Murdoch arrive at the Second Judicial District Court in Reno, Nev., Monday Sept. 16, 2024. (AP Photo/Andy Barron, File)
FILE - Rupert Murdoch, center, and his wife Elena Zhukova Murdoch arrive at the Second Judicial District Court in Reno, Nev., Monday Sept. 16, 2024. (AP Photo/Andy Barron, File)
LAS VEGAS (AP) — Nevada's high court is weighing whether to open up courtroom access and unseal records in the secretive legal dispute over who will control Rupert Murdoch's powerful media empire after he dies.
The case has been unfolding behind closed doors in state court in Reno, with most documents under seal. But , which said it obtained some of the documents, revealed Murdoch's efforts to give control to just one of his sons to ensure that Fox News maintains its conservative editorial slant.
The Nevada Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday on a bid by media outlets including the Times and The Associated Press to let the public in on the Murdochs' legal spat. The court said it will issue its decision at a later date.
Murdoch’s media empire, which also includes The Wall Street Journal and New York Post, spans continents and . Lachlan Murdoch has been the head of Fox News and News Corp since his father in 2023.
The issue at the center of the case is Rupert Murdoch's family trust that would divide control of the company equally among — Lachlan, Prudence, Elisabeth and James — after his death.
Irrevocable trusts are typically used to limit estate taxes, among other reasons, and can’t be changed without permission from the beneficiaries or a court order.
Rupert Murdoch has attempted to alter the trust. But Prudence, Elisabeth and James have united to try to stop that, according to the Times.
James and Elisabeth are both known to have less conservative political views than their father or brother, potentially complicating the media mogul's desire to keep Fox News' political tone.
The dispute has had many twists and turns, including a probate commissioner ruling against Rupert Murdoch in December.
In a 96-page opinion, the commissioner characterized the plan to change the trust as a “carefully crafted charade†to “permanently cement Lachlan Murdoch’s executive roles†inside the empire “regardless of the impacts such control would have over the companies or the beneficiaries†of the family trust, .
Adam Streisand, a lawyer for Rupert Murdoch, told the newspaper at the time that they were disappointed with the ruling and intended to appeal. Another evidentiary hearing is scheduled for this month.
