What is relevant is that the judge made no judgment other than to allow the publication of the testimony.
##############################################
What is relevant is whether the information gathered is true or false. And why would a judge allow the release of the information if it were known to be false??
Honestly, I have no clue. Perhaps, like so may judges, he sees no reasonable remedy should he rule for the plaintiff? We are in a time where judgers seem inclined towards cases that are centered around democratic “fleeting” concerns, but hardly worried about laws and constitutions. It’s as if they are chaperoning a bunch of soft-headed feelings through the twisted maze of legalese that stands athwart their momentary “desires”..... A sad state of affairs.