CHEYENNE -- Press groups in Wyoming and Colorado are seeking to intervene in a federal court case involving a Northern Arapaho man who killed a bald eagle for use in his tribe's Sun Dance.

The Wyoming Press Association and the Colorado Press Association both filed papers with the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver last week supporting the request by Winslow Friday for a new hearing on his case.

Friday, 23, has asked all 12 active judges on the appeals court to review a decision handed down in May by a three-judge court panel that he must stand trial on a misdemeanor charge.

The press groups say Friday's case raises important issues about how appeals courts consider factual rulings made by lower courts in First Amendment cases. They say the decision in Friday's case could influence how the press defends itself in libel cases and similar matters. The Associated Press is a member of both state press associations.

The Northern Arapaho Tribe and the ACLU also have filed in support of Friday's reconsideration request.

U.S. District Judge William Downes in 2006 dismissed the criminal charge against Friday. The judge ruled that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had shown "callous indifference" to the religious beliefs of American Indians. Downes ruled that the federal agency wouldn't have given Friday a permit to kill the eagle even if he had applied for one.

In its ruling in May, however, the three-judge panel of the 10th Circuit reconsidered Downes' factual findings in the case. The panel sided with government lawyers who argued that Friday didn't have standing to challenge the federal permit system that can allow American Indians to kill eagles for religious ceremonies because Friday never applied for such a permit.

Lawyers say federal appeals courts around the country are divided on the question of when they should reconsider a district court's factual findings in cases involving First Amendment issues. Some circuits will only reconsider a judge's factual rulings when they are clearly in error, while other circuits will review the facts from the ground up in every case.

In its request to intervene in Friday's case, the Colorado Press Association states that if the panel's decision in Friday's case is allowed to stand, newspaper publishers could face the prospect of having to defend defamation cases twice -- once at the district court level and then again on appeal.

"Such uncertainty in litigation outcomes, in addition to the cost of having to defend against unmeritorious claims, could itself significantly chill the exercise of free speech rights," the association states.

Steven Zansberg, lawyer for the Colorado Press Association, said the association is supporting Friday's request for a rehearing by the full court "in order to determine whether or not verdicts for defendants in defamation and other such cases are entitled to deference on appeal, or are to be reviewed (over again), under independent appellate review."

Bruce Moats, lawyer for the Wyoming Press Association, was unavailable for comment on Wednesday.

John D. Carlson, the assistant federal public defender representing Friday, was unavailable for comment Wednesday, his office said.