[angelize56]

I think this would be a wonderful way for US to watch THEM.....you know....we can be like their big brothers and sisters....and find out the truth all at the same time about court proceedings that in the end can affect many of us! The televised Supreme Court proceedings would be both entertaining and educational!

Here's a petition circulating through Grassfire:

As a citizen of the United States, I call on the President of the United States to nominate and the U.S. Senate to conduct fair and timely hearings for the lower federal courts and the U.S. Supreme Court who:

Uphold the original meaning and intent of the Constitution and reject the so-called "living Constitution" model that allows judges to apply their own meaning to our founding document;

Uphold the intended jurisdiction of the courts as outlined by the Constitution and are committed to reversing the imperial court and the doctrine of judicial supremacy on all societal matters.

Are men and women of upstanding moral character who adhere to the historic values of our nation.

Furthermore, to create a climate of public accountability in all U.S. Courtrooms, I support the placement of television cameras in the U.S. Supreme Court and all federal courts during proceedings.

http://www.grassfire.org/64/petition.asp?PID=9441499

[LuckyStrike]

I assume that except in cases of national security, federal court and supreme court proceedings are open to as many people as can fit into the court room. The public already has access to what goes on in the court rooms through print media, so the courts do not currently operate in secret. My gut feeling is that allowing television and other recording devices in the court room would lead to mischief on the part of broadcast media. MSM would heavily edit video and audio for news broadcast to tell the public only what they want them to know or think. Although I voted "undecided", the more I think about it, the more my gut feeling is "no".

[angelize56]

Looking at it your way LS...why bother if the recordings can be edited....but how would they do this fast enough if the proceedings were being televised live...those pesky 20 or 30 second delays?

[LuckyStrike]

Well I assume you are talking about something like cspan that is a live feed not controlled by the media. Folks who actually watch the proceedings live of course would see with their own eyes and hear with their own ears. I am guessing that the vast majority of the public would see only the video and audio clips broadcast on the news, so the opportunity to shape public opinion with selective reporting and creative editing would not be diminished. Cspan is not available where I am, and if it was I probably would not normally watch it because I normally am occupied with sleeping, eating, working, or maybe just doing something more interesting. I suspect that I am typical. Persons who have the interest or desire to follow the Supreme court closely such as yourself would watch, but persons who seek to keep themselves informed, such as yourself, can do that now.

[angelize56]

I probably wouldn't watch....but I'm sure lots of others would find it interesting...I do have CSpan...

[marcus77]

C-Span would be the perfect medium for this. It's our tax dollars and our country, so we have the right to know.

Although, I can understand certain trials not allowing cameras due to privacy, but not all.

[LuckyStrike]

Furthermore, to create a climate of public accountability in all U.S. Courtrooms, I support the placement of television cameras in the U.S. Supreme Court and all federal courts during proceedings.

I do not want the supreme court to be accountable to the public. I want the supreme court to faithfully follow the constitution regardless of the whims of popular public opinion.

[bassetman]

Originally Posted by LuckyStrike

I do not want the supreme court to be accountable to the public. I want the supreme court to faithfully follow the constitution regardless of the whims of popular public opinion.

So do you want them to understand it?

[LuckyStrike]

Originally Posted by bassetman

So do you want them to understand it?

You mean the justices? Yes, of course, what are you getting at?

The constitution is an easy to understand document. The problem comes when justices creatively interpret the constitution to serve their own bias, to achieve that which they cannot achieve legislatively, or to federalize powers that rightfully belong to the states or to the people. Worse yet is when justices look to foreign law to justify their rulings. This reveals a mindset that the supreme court is not only the supreme court, but also the supreme legislative body, which I believe is dangerous and wrong.

[TooBad]

If you think it would engender trust in the courts to televise it, just take a day off from work and go sit in a courtroom. It is very different if you do not have a stake in a case. I have done so 5-6 times and the words "kangaroo justice" come to mind but don't quite make it. I have seen judges basically kick people out of their state for 2-3 years by giving a sentence of 30-60 days to comence at 6pm. He then asks if the person can be out of the state by 6pm and states that if they are found in the state within the 2-3year period the sentence will be enforced. I have wondered if the state tourism department knows about these kinds of rulings. The case in point was a jay-walking case!

If everyone was privy to court cases, judges might fear for their lives as the nutcases would have more ammunition to hate them with. Our system pretends that justice is the objective in court. Nothing could be further from the truth. It is all about using the law to control the people that the system wants to control. And making sure that a lawyer gets a paycheck. I know that sounds very cynical and I know there are honest and good lawyers out there, but I believe that they are the minority, unfortunately.

[izme]

We must hold the courts and the Politicians and the Corporations accountable and keep them in check, otherwise none of us would have a pot to pi$$ in. Democracy demands it.

[iltos]

Originally Posted by LuckyStrike

I do not want the supreme court to be accountable to the public. I want the supreme court to faithfully follow the constitution regardless of the whims of popular public opinion.

i don't believe anyone is advocating that the court consider public opinion in their decisions...the fact that their decisions and dissenting opinions are available online in many cases, and that some people are still clamoring for televised proceedings only points to the fact that same info should perhaps be transimitted thru various media, to reach the greatest possible number of people.

how can this be a bad thing?

[AGCurry]

Your choices in this poll are not satisfactory. Yes, we SHOULD know what goes on; however, TV is not the answer, for the reasons stated by Lucky Strike.

[LuckyStrike]

Originally Posted by iltos

i don't believe anyone is advocating that the court consider public opinion in their decisions...the fact that their decisions and dissenting opinions are available online in many cases, and that some people are still clamoring for televised proceedings only points to the fact that same info should perhaps be transimitted thru various media, to reach the greatest possible number of people.

how can this be a bad thing?

This would not be a bad thing, it would be a good thing if the people would directly watch the proceedings. However the proceedings would be lengthy and boring most of the time. The people who do not seek out the information available in the print media or internet now would most likely not watch a direct feed of the supreme court on television. Folks who get their information from television would mostly see only the clips and sound bites that MSM wants them to see. For most people this would not mean more information, but rather more misinformation.

[Gabriel]

I feel it should all be out in the open....But a lot would be done behind the scenes that shouldn't to effect outcomes.....I am undecided