And they say it can't happen in America...

[Bullypulpit]

<center><h1><a href=http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/12/opinion/12HERB.html?pagewanted=print&position=>A Justice's Sense of Privilege</a></h1></center>

<blockquote>
By BOB HERBERT

Antoinette Konz is a young education reporter for The Hattiesburg American, a daily newspaper with a circulation of about 25,000 in Hattiesburg, Miss. Ms. Konz, 25, has only been in the business for a couple of years, so her outlook hasn't been soiled by the cranks and the criminals, and the pretzel-shaped politicians that so many of us have been covering for too many years to count.

She considered it a big deal when one of the schools on her beat, the Presbyterian Christian High School, invited her to cover a speech that was delivered last Wednesday by Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.

About 300 people, many of them students, filled the school's gymnasium for the speech. They greeted Justice Scalia with a standing ovation.

Ms. Konz and a reporter for The Associated Press, Denise Grones, were seated in the front row. They began to take notes. And when Justice Scalia began speaking, they clicked on their tape recorders.

What's important about this story is that Justice Scalia is a big shot. Not only is he a member in good standing of the nation's most august court, he's almost always among those mentioned as a possible future chief justice.

Compared with him, Ms. Konz and Ms. Grones are nobodies.

Justice Scalia, the big shot, does not like reporters to turn tape recorders on when he's talking, whether that action is protected by the Constitution of the United States or not. He doesn't like it. And he doesn't permit it.</blockquote>

Reporters covering a public speech at a public school...and their tape recorders are confiscated. What's wrong with this picture? What might well expect to find such behavior under a totalitarian regime...But this is America, right?

It is America, but it seems that the Constitution isn't worth the match it would take to burn it anymore. We have an adminstration bent on undermining it, and a Supreme Court Justice who feels that he is above it. The foundation of the American police state is being laid as we blithely go about our daily business. <b>WAKE UP!</b>

 

[5stringJeff]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
It is America, but it seems that the Constitution isn't worth the match it would take to burn it anymore. We have an adminstration bent on undermining it, and a Supreme Court Justice who feels that he is above it. The foundation of the American police state is being laid as we blithely go about our daily business. <b>WAKE UP!</b>

So it's Bush's fault that this marshall confiscated the recordings?

I agree, the marshall was wrong. And Scalia is also wrong for not stopping it. But, Bully, your quickness to blame Bush is ridiculous.

 

[Hobbit]

I think Bully's grasping at straws when he has to find some incident at a high school speech out in the boonies that's not even related to Bush in order to make his point.

So the judge is an a**. He needs to be reprimanded. It has nothing to do with Bush.

 

[insein]

Agreed. It also shows how arrogant these judges get cause they know they are there for life. Appointed not elected into a position for mostly political reasons (Whether it be republican or Democrat at the time who does the appointing), some judges feel that they are the system not just a piece. They feel they can create new laws along with the enforcing aspect.

Thats the real issue here. If a police state is being created, is being enforced by this left wing Judges.

 

[Joz]

I think what has happened here is a faiure to communicate. IF this is how Scalia delivers his speeches then this should have been related to the press and anyone else attending. It was not the fault of the reporters, Scalia or, of all people, Bush.

When I do an art/craft show, cameras are not allowed on the premises. If a person is seen with one, the person will be asked to leave. Plain & simple, tho' it is their constitutional right to have one. It is also our right as artisans not to have our work infringed upon.

Same goes for concerts, etc. The artists have a right to not be distracted during their performance or have photos/tapings displayed/sold without their knowledge or permission.

The Constitution is a guideline, it works only in a perfect world. Somewhere, somehow, someone's 'rights' will be infringed upon. You have a right to smoke, I have a right not to breathe it. I have a right to listen to my car stereo booming as I drive. You have a right to be able to hear the traffic around you. And on and on and on.

 

[insein]

Originally posted by Joz
I think what has happened here is a faiure to communicate. IF this is how Scalia delivers his speeches then this should have been related to the press and anyone else attending. It was not the fault of the reporters, Scalia or, of all people, Bush.

When I do an art/craft show, cameras are not allowed on the premises. If a person is seen with one, the person will be asked to leave. Plain & simple, tho' it is their constitutional right to have one. It is also our right as artisans not to have our work infringed upon.

Same goes for concerts, etc. The artists have a right to not be distracted during their performance or have photos/tapings displayed/sold without their knowledge or permission.

The Constitution is a guideline, it works only in a perfect world. Somewhere, somehow, someone's 'rights' will be infringed upon. You have a right to smoke, I have a right not to breathe it. I have a right to listen to my car stereo booming as I drive. You have a right to be able to hear the traffic around you. And on and on and on.

Also true. the same reason why you have to ask permission to record your Teacher's lectures. Its their personal Speech and they may not want it used to promote or be ridiculed by third parties that they arent aware of. I did forget about the artisan rule.

 

[Moi]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
<center><h1><a href=http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/12/opinion/12HERB.html?pagewanted=print&position=>A Justice's Sense of Privilege</a></h1></center>

<blockquote>
By BOB HERBERT

Antoinette Konz is a young education reporter for The Hattiesburg American, a daily newspaper with a circulation of about 25,000 in Hattiesburg, Miss. Ms. Konz, 25, has only been in the business for a couple of years, so her outlook hasn't been soiled by the cranks and the criminals, and the pretzel-shaped politicians that so many of us have been covering for too many years to count.

She considered it a big deal when one of the schools on her beat, the Presbyterian Christian High School, invited her to cover a speech that was delivered last Wednesday by Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.

About 300 people, many of them students, filled the school's gymnasium for the speech. They greeted Justice Scalia with a standing ovation.

Ms. Konz and a reporter for The Associated Press, Denise Grones, were seated in the front row. They began to take notes. And when Justice Scalia began speaking, they clicked on their tape recorders.

What's important about this story is that Justice Scalia is a big shot. Not only is he a member in good standing of the nation's most august court, he's almost always among those mentioned as a possible future chief justice.

Compared with him, Ms. Konz and Ms. Grones are nobodies.

Justice Scalia, the big shot, does not like reporters to turn tape recorders on when he's talking, whether that action is protected by the Constitution of the United States or not. He doesn't like it. And he doesn't permit it.</blockquote>

Reporters covering a public speech at a public school...and their tape recorders are confiscated. What's wrong with this picture? What might well expect to find such behavior under a totalitarian regime...But this is America, right?

It is America, but it seems that the Constitution isn't worth the match it would take to burn it anymore. We have an adminstration bent on undermining it, and a Supreme Court Justice who feels that he is above it. The foundation of the American police state is being laid as we blithely go about our daily business. <b>WAKE UP!</b>

What is wrong with this picture is that Justice Scalia told everyone that his speech was not to be recorded and the idiots did so anyway. Their tapes were erased. Nothing nefarious, nothing in violation of the constitution.

Deal with that.

 

[winston churchi]

A reporter of all persons should know the do's and don'ts when it comes to tape recording anyone.

I do not know the laws in each state - but it is my understand that when a person is speaking be it to the public, a school or any other organazation - their is a requirement to have permission to record that person.

When I was taking courses in (security/weight-balance/computor entry or anything else) it was understood that recorders were not allowed however note taking was.

This is not something new...and certainly not to a reporter who should have had enough of sense to know the rights of the speaker.

I would not waste any further time getting upset at this.

 

[acludem]

Scalia spoke on a campus near my home a couple of years ago. He doesn't allow for any pictures or recordings of his speeches. I think he's scared to have the American people know what kind of whacko is on the Supreme Court. I've seen Clarence Thomas give lectures that were shown on C-Span. Chief Justice Rehnquist has done this as well. What makes Scalia think he's so high and mighty that he should be allowed to hide from the American people? If this was Justice Breyer, Ginsburg or Stevens you righties would crying bloody murder.

acludem

 

[insein]

Nah, i know theres a problem in america with judges but this isnt it. There arrogance causes problems. But anyone is well within their rights to refuse photos and recordings.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by insein
Nah, i know theres a problem in america with judges but this isnt it. There arrogance causes problems. But anyone is well within their rights to refuse photos and recordings.

Concerts are one thing...speeches by public officials in public venues are quite another however. After all, we're talking about a guy who claims Dick Cheney as a butt-buddy, goes duck hunting with him (what they ACTUALLY did in the blind is another thing entirely) and refuses to recuse himself from a case involving the veep's secret meetings with executives from energy companies in formulating US policy. Yeah...he's arrogant all right.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
Concerts are one thing...speeches by public officials in public venues are quite another however. After all, we're talking about a guy who claims Dick Cheney as a butt-buddy, goes duck hunting with him (what they ACTUALLY did in the blind is another thing entirely) and refuses to recuse himself from a case involving the veep's secret meetings with executives from energy companies in formulating US policy. Yeah...he's arrogant all right.

ANd too bad you couldn't be bothered to learn the TRUTH!

Scalia didn't remove the recording devices - it was done so by a US marshal.

"In a letter to Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press Executive Director Lucy Dalglish, Scalia said he didn't approve of the actions by a U.S. Marshal, who seized the recorders and ordered the recordings erased. "You were correct that the action was not taken at my direction; I was upset as you were," Scalia wrote. "I have written to the reporters involved, extending my apology.""

http://209.11.49.220/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000485311

Thank for proving yet again how clueless you are, Bully.

 

[Avatar4321]

The man doesnt want his speeches recorded. whats wrong with that? Thats his personal preference. Quite frankly i am not even sure i think any of the judges should be giving public speeches. there job is to judge the law according to the Constitution. Why should they speak out on anything?

But since he isnt obligated to speak anywhere to begin with, and he makes the conditions for his speeches that include not letting tape recording devises to record them, why on earth should it surprise anyone that the press has their tapes taken from them when the speech given on the condition that it wasnt taped? Why on earth should we let a few reporters violate the rules and make Scalia less likely to speak to begin with? If these places want him to give a speech then let them, but if the press is going to cover it they should atleast have respect for his personal wishes.

 

[Moi]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
Concerts are one thing...speeches by public officials in public venues are quite another however. After all, we're talking about a guy who claims Dick Cheney as a butt-buddy, goes duck hunting with him (what they ACTUALLY did in the blind is another thing entirely) and refuses to recuse himself from a case involving the veep's secret meetings with executives from energy companies in formulating US policy. Yeah...he's arrogant all right.

You might think he's arrogant. We all think you are ignorant. You make issues out of nothing and you fail to understand real issues.

Bet Scalia still sleeps at night. I know I do. Comforted by the knowledge that people are free to decide for themselves if others can tape record them!