This past month, Justice Sonia Sotomayor has come forward against allowing cameras in the Supreme Court. These cameras would broadcast the courtroom proceedings over television and possibly stream footage to the Internet. The article can be found here.
Sotomayor supports her stance against recording courtrooms with the reasoning that viewers would not understand what was going on. In an interview, she said that "Very few of them understand what the process is, which is to play devil’s advocate." She believes that someone watching the case at home would not see the full case and make assumptions. A viewer's opinion of her would be skewed without context.
However, Sotomayor is not the only Justice against this. Justice Elena Kagan also has criticisms about televising the courts: she fears that "people might play to the camera" in an attempt to make themselves more appealing to the public. I do see why this would be a concern, but witnesses in court are sworn to the truth. However, I don't see why witnesses or defendants playing to the cameras would have any effect on the outcome of the trial. Anyone viewing at home has no bearing on the trial, and both sides are already trying to convince the justices that their side is the right one. Appealing to others would get them nowhere.
What do you think? Should the public have the ability to see what goes on in America's Supreme Court? do you think camera coverage change anything about the trials? Post your thoughts in the comments below.
I agree with many of Sotomayor's comments. Many viewers watching a court case would not watch the entire coverage of the case, and therefore would jump to false conclusions about many different things. Also, it seems like something like the law should not be for entertainment, but solely about finding the truth. If there haven't been cameras in the courtroom thus far, why would they want to change something that has been working for a long time now?
ReplyDeleteHi Sean,
ReplyDeleteA timely post, given the weight of current decisions being considered this season. You might remind us of that fact to give this post a bit more currency. After all, there are many gay rights activists and opponents speaking out in DC and it seemed to spread to social media like Facebook.
I would also link to the "controversy" of when Congress was in that same predicament regarding C-SPAN cameras. This would give your post more of a historical anchor.