Judges have immense power over people’s lives and little oversight.

The citizens of Island County have long been fortunate in having two Superior Court judges who have proven to be professional, intelligent and compassionate.

Judges Alan Hancock and Vickie Churchill have also long strived to be as open and transparent as possible, whether it comes to ensuring that the people before them understand what’s happening, their reluctance to seal documents from public view and their openness to allowing media access to the courtrooms.

So Churchill’s recent decision to censor a Whidbey News-Times reporter’s ability to photograph murder suspects in court was both surprising and extremely disappointing.

The attorney representing one of the defendants objected to having his client photographed. He admitted he had no specific evidence to point to, but he had a generalized concern that witnesses’ ability to identify a defendant might be compromised by a news photograph.

Afterward, the Whidbey News-Times heard from citizens, attorneys and even editors from other newspapers who were puzzled by Churchill’s decision.

General Rule 16, which is supposed to govern courtroom photography by the media, is clear — open access is presumed.

“Limitations on access must be supported by reasons found by the judge to be sufficiently compelling to outweigh that presumption,” the rule states.

In other words, the default position should always be openness unless the judge can find and articulate a very specific reason for suppressing speech.

Contrary to General Rule 16, Churchill didn’t explain her decision with “specific circumstances of the case” but generalized about the rights of the press versus the rights of the accused and a fair trial.

Churchill got it backwards. She said she was acting out of “an abundance of caution,” as if the First Amendment and the rights of the press are the lesser, throw-away rights.

In fact, caution — abundant or not — should always compel government officials to err on the side of openness. That’s what General Rule 16 says and that’s what the state’s sunshine laws say.

For those who can’t be there, a photograph of a defendant in a courtroom tells part of an important story in a visceral way. It reminds us that it’s a real person who may have committed a crime and whose liberty has been stripped away.

We can see the emotion, the humanity — or lack of.

With defendants in jail clothing and shackles, we can see how defendants are treated or held to account.

As they say, a photo is sometimes worth a thousand words.