Cameras in the Supreme Court...

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Reasoning, Aug 4, 2010.

  1. Reasoning
    Offline

    Reasoning Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
    Messages:
    403
    Thanks Received:
    70
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +71
    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwmdFcVy1tA]YouTube - The Case for Cameras in the Supreme Court[/ame]
     
  2. Father Time
    Offline

    Father Time I'll be Still Alive

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2008
    Messages:
    5,130
    Thanks Received:
    438
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +438
    I'm not sure what benefit having cameras in the Supreme Court would bring.

    The only thing I can think of is that if one of them were to make a faux pas it'd give the media something to obsess over. Not sure if that's a good thing.
     
  3. FA_Q2
    Offline

    FA_Q2 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2009
    Messages:
    14,308
    Thanks Received:
    2,087
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Washington State
    Ratings:
    +4,319
    Cameras should be MANDATORY in the USSC as the cases that are heard there have far reaching impacts on all our lives. I, as an American citizen, have the right to see how and what my government is doing at virtually all times. There is a need to keep the deliberations of these cases out of the public eye so that the judges can come to sound decisions without worrying about the public but there is absolutely no reason that the trials are not available on tape.
     
  4. Big Black Dog
    Offline

    Big Black Dog Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    22,918
    Thanks Received:
    5,110
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Ratings:
    +5,720
    I think there should be cameras in every courtroom in the land. The public has a right to know, and show know what goes on in our courts. It should all be a matter of public record. This way, everybody could see first hand what kind of justice is being served up in today's courtrooms, and there would be no secrets about who was guilty and guilty of what. We would also have first hand knowledge of the judges we have elected to serve us.
     
  5. DiveCon
    Offline

    DiveCon gone

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2008
    Messages:
    48,025
    Thanks Received:
    3,387
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +3,387
    that, and the potential for grandstanding
     
  6. washamericom
    Offline

    washamericom Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2010
    Messages:
    9,383
    Thanks Received:
    735
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Ratings:
    +2,701
    would judge judy be on the show ?
     
  7. goldcatt
    Offline

    goldcatt Catch me if you can! Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    10,330
    Thanks Received:
    2,331
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    CentralPA
    Ratings:
    +2,331
    Trials? The Supreme Court doesn't do trials.

    Caveat: with a few exceptions so rare you can count the number of trials held by SCOTUS in its entire history on one hand minus a finger or two.

    It listens to oral arguments in appellate cases which are, in effect, only clarifications of points in the briefs submitted by the parties and others long before the hearing. I'm not sure what good cameras would do, since to understand the oral arguments the audience would have to understand the briefs. Not that most people can't do that if they felt like spending the time - but how many would?

    Or would the people advoocating cameras also advocate dumbing down the process so Judge Judy fans don't have to put in any effort to follow it? Polarize the ideological camps even further by promoting rah rah team grandstanding? Maybe add a few talking heads and a spin room to turn it into a real freakshow? :eek:

    No thanks. The proceedings are open gallery and fully reported. What more do we need?
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2010
  8. LuckyDan
    Offline

    LuckyDan Sublime

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2009
    Messages:
    2,327
    Thanks Received:
    607
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    The mountains of North Central Texas
    Ratings:
    +609
    Open your mind, GC. Get with the times!

    I see pop-up fun-facts about the Solicitor General, the amendments. Sound effects. A "cuckoo" for stupid questions and a "ding!" for good ones. 800#s to phone in your own decision. A half-time show ("Do Process!") with commentary, including body language analysis. We'd need a legal "Jimmy the Greek" type to give odds. Maybe Dershowitz. He's hyper enough. We could call it SCTV! (Or has that been done? No matter. We'll think of something.)
     
  9. R.C. Christian
    Offline

    R.C. Christian Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2010
    Messages:
    9,955
    Thanks Received:
    1,074
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Location:
    Ghetto
    Ratings:
    +1,195
    Absolutely. The government, especially the SCOTUS should be held accountable for their misdeeds. We should be able to hear who says what and with what emotion. Then and only then can they be held accountable to the population and sleep at night, restless, with one eye open waiting for the U.S. population to lynch their sorry asses if and when they start shredding the constitution.
     
  10. cad
    Offline

    cad Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2010
    Messages:
    874
    Thanks Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +64
    what about the promise that health care negotiations were to be broadcast on CSPAN?
    i want to know how the cornhusker kickback went down. or the louisiana purchase.
     

Share This Page