« Law - "Remaking cities: What price?" | Main | Ind. Law - My latest Res Gestae article coincides with important Boston Globe feature today »
Sunday, April 30, 2006
Law - Cameras in the U.S. Supreme Courtroom
"Courtroom camera bill stirs debate" is the headline to this story today in the Chicago Tribune. Some quotes:
WASHINGTON -- As far as opinions go, Justice David Souter has made it clear what he thinks of TV cameras in Supreme Court hearings."I think the case is so strong," Souter told a House subcommittee in 1996, "that I can tell you the day you see a camera come into our courtroom it's going to roll over my dead body."
But now a bill sponsored by Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) and approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee he leads would force the Supreme Court to let cameras into its hallowed halls, one of the few public spaces in Washington, along with other federal courts, where cameras are banned.
That prospect miffed two other justices, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas, who told a House subcommittee early this month that if Congress authorized the use of cameras at the court, it would mar the Supreme Court's decorum, endanger the justices' personal security and raise constitutional questions over the proper role of each branch of government. * * *
Supporters of courtroom cameras dismiss Kennedy's assertion on legal grounds that forcing cameras into the court would raise separation-of-powers concerns. They note that Congress sets the judiciary's budget, its jurisdiction and the number of justices.
"For him to say that we couldn't say that you have cameras in the courtroom is just idiotic," said Grassley, who has proposed legislation that would let judges decide whether to televise proceedings in their courtrooms. The Specter measure would force the nine justices to admit cameras into the court although they could on a case-by-case basis have them banned. * * *
The Supreme Court now makes audio recordings and transcripts of the oral arguments available later each term. Recordings for noteworthy cases are [ILB - should read "may be"] released immediately after a hearing. * * *
At the state level, numerous states allow cameras and televising of trials; Illinois does not. [ILB - neither does Indiana, but, more on point here, Indiana does provide webcasts of the Indiana Supreme Court oral arguments].
Posted by Marcia Oddi on April 30, 2006 11:02 AM
Posted to General Law Related