Supreme Court Cameras Not A Good Idea
Allow Ol' BC to disagree with this high profile MSNBC blogger. I personally believe that cameras have no place in the SCOTUS. Period. I have no idea what the Senate Judiciary Committee was thinking. The blog had one interesting comment -
Well this could mean Justice Souter will be taken out on a gurney.
After all, he once said, “The day you see a camera in our courtroom is going to
be over my dead body.”
While it seems I seldom agree with Justice Souter, in this case I do.
Then there's Justice Scalia who said he would not be opposed to a camera if
and only if somehow the media could be forced to present the arguments from
beginning to end.
Well, I happen to think the world of Scalia. In this case, however, I think he should know better. This would never happen. The media always seems to edit to meet their own ends. I guess it could be said ...they lie. Some traditions are better left alone.
Just a thought.
posted by Ol' BC @ 2:48 PM
3 comments
3 Comments:
The most glaring example of courtroom cameras I've seen was in the OJ Simpson trial. It was an embarrassment for all concerned--especially Judge Ito. They were all playing to the camera.
Even so, I think it ought to be left to the discretion of the judge. I don't see a Constitutional issue here.
I do think that these cases ought to be subject to superior court review, however.
Or, perhaps proceedings could be taped for release only after the trial is over....even if only for legal review by higher courts or law school classes.
We've already got that Beef ... it's called CourtTV, and I can see exactly what you mean by what you say. What happens in the courts shouldn't be broadcast all over for everyone to see.
Of course we live in the era of Dr. Phil and Jerry Springer, so no one should be surprised that this has been brought up.
RWR
www.rightwingrocker.com
Post a Comment
<< Home