There has long been conflict between the First and Sixth Amendments, particularly press freedoms and the right of a defendant to have a fair trial. This thesis expands on this conflict, and potential solutions, by looking at the 2013 trial of Jodi Arias. It further elaborates on what responsibilities the courts, and the media, have in protecting a defendant’s right to an impartial jury. The first section of this thesis addresses conflict between the First and Sixth Amendments, the ways that the justice system works to resolve these conflicts, and similar high-profile cases demonstrating the conflict. The second part of this thesis explains the complex events of both the trial and the sentencing retrial. Next, media coverage of the trial will be compared with how the presiding judge attempted to protect Arias’ rights. By the end of this thesis, readers will be able to understand the evolution of the First and Sixth Amendments, how the justice system reconciles differences between the two and how coverage shifted throughout the trial. Finally, readers will be able to see how saturated media coverage impacted Arias’ right to a fair trial, and what this means for high profile criminal cases in the future. This thesis makes recommendations both for the justice system and for media organizations, on how to prevent similar issues seen in the Arias trial from occurring in future trials. The hope is that through an analysis of the Arias trial, and the recommendations made at the conclusion of the thesis, judges and media organizations will be able to work together to better protect both the First and Sixth Amendments to the best of their ability.