Part of the Supreme Court’s appeal, at least for me, has always been its sense of mystery. Nine robed justices sit on the high bench, question the lowly lawyers, retreat to their conference room to debate, and a decision finally emerges many months later. What goes on behind the scenes? Few know, but sadly few Americans also have no idea what goes on in the more public courtroom.
While in theory open to the public, oral argument at the Supreme Court is not something most Americans have seen. The only way to actually watch it is to go to the Supreme Court and see it live. Audio recordings are released about a week later, but the Court continues to ban cameras from taping the arguments.
C-SPAN, despite its perennial unpopularity, has at least broken down some of the barriers between the people and the legislative branch of the government. Viewers can see the daily work of Congressmen and get a sense of how their votes actually translate into government action. Similarly, the major news outlets can always cover the major presidential speeches and events.
But the Supreme Court has no C-SPAN. There are still the recordings and transcripts of the cases, even the occasional Court artist to create a rough sketch of the proceedings, but these cannot equal the power of actual video. Without greater access to the Court, there is little possibility that Americans will develop an understanding of the judicial branch.
This is by no means a new argument. A recent editorial in the New York Times essentially made a similar case for broadcasting oral arguments, but it is still and important one to make. With only one percent of Americans capable of naming all nine justices on the Court, it’s clear that something must be done to help engage citizens with their judiciary.
Allowing television access is one important step. While some of the justices may argue that broadcasting could encourage some lawyers to put on an act for the camera, the ultimate power still resides with the justices to make decisions and ask the tough questions. One reprimand from the bench and any lawyer putting on a show could be easily put in his place.
However, I would also argue that televising the Supreme Court should be taken a step further. It isn’t enough to simply create a C-SPAN style program for the Court. Instead, the Court should invest more of its energy to creating a way citizens can access it through the internet. Posting the oral arguments online would go a long way towards creating a greater understanding of the Court. More and more Americans rely on the internet for news and information every year, but the Court has remained firmly planted in tradition. While the SCOTUS blog has done a great deal in keeping interested citizens informed about goings on at the Court, the lack of video is still troubling.
It’s time that the Court shed some of the shackles of traditionalism and join the modern age. I for one look forward to the day that I can actually see oral argument from the comfort of my home, even if it means that a little bit of the Court’s mystery is lost in the process.
Photo Credit: Wikimedia Commons
© 2024 Harvard Political Review. All rights reserved.