Blogroll

• Above the Law
  
• Althouse
  
• Bag and Baggage
  
• Dennis Kennedy
  
• Ernie the Attorney
  
• Patent Baristas
  
• Patently-O
  
• PrawfsBlawg
• Professor Bainbridge
  
• SCOTUSblog
  
• Volokh Conspiracy
  
• The Wall Street Journal's Law Blog
  

« Marketers' Favorite Marketing Books | Main | Legal Scholars Topic Du Jour: Menstruation »

Cameras in the Court: Roll 'em -- Or Not

I've never bought the arguments against televising Supreme Court proceedings. Cameras enhance public understanding and confidence, and the justices and litigants will quickly forget they are there. But with legislation pending in Congress that would require the court to televise its proceedings, the topic takes on renewed urgency. For this reason, a symposium published this week, discussed at the blog Concurring Opinions, is well worth reading.

Published by the Michigan Law  Review's online journal First Impressions, the symposium features a diverse group of authors exploring the implications of  the prospective legislation and the potential risks and benefits of  televising the court’s proceedings. The contributors:

• U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Boyce F. Martin Jr. contends that cameras in the court would help educate Americans about how their government works and heighten awareness of important legal issues.
• University of Michigan Law Professor Christina B. Whitman argues that cameras would mislead viewers by providing only randomly useful insights about the court.
• Legal Times Supreme Court correspondent Tony Mauro argues that Sen. Specter is taking the wrong approach in the way he is promoting the bill.
• C-SPAN Corporate Vice President and General Counsel Bruce D. Collins describes C-SPAN’s past efforts to televise Supreme Court proceedings and clarifies how if given the opportunity, C-SPAN would approach televising the court.
• Appellate litigator Kenneth N. Flaxman provides a practitioner's perspective, explaining why televising Supreme Court proceedings would make his job as arguing counsel easier.
• Fairleigh Dickinson University Professor Bruce Peabody assesses whether Sen. Specter’s legislation would breach constitutional etiquette.
• University of Michigan law student Scott C. Wilcox proposes a compromise: to forestall congressional action, the justices should voluntarily introduce archival video recording.

To download a PDF of the entire symposium, click here.

Posted by Robert J. Ambrogi on May 25, 2007 at 05:43 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)