Now that would be Court TV

U.S. Supreme Court Justices Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas are unhappy about the Senate Judiciary Committee’s recent passage of a proposal to televise the court’s sessions. Thomas told a House committee Tuesday that cameras would undermine or at least change the court’s proceedings. Kennedy as much as told lawmakers to mind their own business. True, the decision should be the court’s, but the justices should realize that they would build public trust in the judicial system by raising the curtain on their history-making work. (And too bad that, in any case, it couldn’t happen in time for Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline’s reargument of the death penalty case April 25. As all Kansans know by now, Kline is always ready for his close-up.)
Posted by Rhonda Holman

3 Comments

  1. writerdog
    Posted April 9, 2006 at 7:29 am | Permalink

    Does anyone else remember the first time they saw CSPAN? If it was not so comical seeing how our government reps acted….It was sad how they act! Sen. Byrd of W.V. rivaled Jerry Lewis for a dysfunctional character.

  2. J R
    Posted April 9, 2006 at 10:58 pm | Permalink

    I think the Supreme Court should be televised. These folks have an awful lot of power for it to be kept in the dark.

    I wish I could have SEEN coverage of Bush v. Gore. I wish I could have seen their faces and actions when they decided on eminent domain.

    Justice does not fear the light of day and neither should the Supreme Court.

    Maybe they just don’t want us to see Scalia banging on the table while Thomas dozes off…..stirring only occasionally to say “Yeah what Tony said!”

  3. raptor
    Posted April 10, 2006 at 7:18 am | Permalink

    The problem with televising it is that shows almost nothing. The oral arguments are submitted in writing in advance, all decisions are made behind closed doors, the verbal arguments are for show only.

    There was a fabulous book written some years ago about the politics behind the scenes at the Supreme Court. I forget the name of it, something that ended, “…on the bench”, written by a former supreme court law clerk.

    Anyway, it would not give much insight into the decision process. And, it is up to the court to decide, not the legislature. Has Congress forgotten the system of checks and balances of three branches of government?